Hundreds of rescuers have been deployed to search for people missing in central Texas, after flash floods killed 51 people, including 15 children.

The worst affected area is Kerr County where 43 people have died and where 27 children remain missing from a Christian youth camp located along the River Guadalupe.

“The work continues, and will continue, until everyone is found,” promised Larry Leitha, the sheriff of Kerr County.

People have also been confirmed dead in other parts of the state, including Travis County and Tom Green County.

Multiple flash flood warnings remain in place over the weekend in central Texas.

About 850 people have been rescued so far.

At a news conference on Saturday afternoon, Texas Governor Greg Abbott said he had signed an expanded disaster declaration to boost search efforts.

He said officials would be relentless in ensuring they locate “every single person who’s been a victim of this event”, adding that “we will stop when the job is completed”.

It remains a search and rescue mission, officials said, not a recovery effort.

They said rescuers were going up and down the Guadalupe River to try to find people who may have been swept away by the floods.

US President Donald Trump said his administration was working closely with local authorities to respond to the emergency.

Forecasters have warned that central Texas may see more flooding this weekend.

The National Weather Service (NWS) said the area could see 2 to 5in (5cm to 12cm) of rain on Saturday.

Up to 10in of rain was possible in some areas badly affected by Friday’s deluge.

Much of the rescue has focused on a large all-girls’ Christian summer camp called Camp Mystic, located along the banks of the Guadalupe River.

Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick told the BBC’s Radio 4 PM programme many of 27 missing girls were “under the age of 12”.

Pictures from the camp show it in disarray, with blankets, mattresses, teddy bears and other belongings caked in mud.

Many were asleep when the river rose more than 26ft (8m) in less than an hour in the early hours of Friday.

In an email to parents of the roughly 750 campers, Camp Mystic said that if they had not been contacted directly, their child had been accounted for.

More details of those who died have started to emerge – some were as young as eight. It has also been confirmed sisters Blair and Brooke Harber, who were 13 and 11, are among the dead.

A special Mass will be held at Notre Dame Catholic Church on Sunday for those who died or are missing, and their families.

Scores of campers holidaying during the Independence Day weekend, were also unaccounted for.

Lorena Guillen, whose home and restaurant were destroyed, had 28 holidaymakers’ cars staying on her land near the river. She told the BBC News Channel that she heard screams from a family of five.

“They were getting washed away,” Guillen said. “They were clinging on trees to be rescued. But the rescuers couldn’t get to them.”

Rachel Reed drove five hours from Dallas to pick up her daughter. She told the BBC that members of her Church and children’s school district were among the girls dead and missing.

“The families of those campers are living every parent’s worst nightmare,” she said. “Of course, it could have been me.”

Others started returning to the flooded areas.

Jonathan and Brittany Rojas visited their relatives’ home – where only the foundation remained.

They told the BBC that the mother and a baby of the family remained missing. A teenage son, Leo, survived after he became snared in barbed wire.

Another resident, Anthony, found his apartment full of mud and debris. His belongings were not salvageable, except a box holding childhood photos and his baby blanket.

“I lost everything I own,” he told the BBC. “Now I’m trying to figure things out.”

Israel has decided to send a delegation to Qatar on Sunday for proximity talks with Hamas on the latest proposal for a Gaza ceasefire and hostage release deal.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said he had accepted the invitation despite what he described as the “unacceptable” changes that Hamas wanted to make to a plan presented by mediators from Qatar, the US and Egypt.

On Friday night, Hamas said it had delivered a “positive response” to the proposal for a 60-day ceasefire and that it was ready for negotiations.

However, a Palestinian official said the group had sought amendments including a guarantee that hostilities would not resume if talks on a permanent truce failed.

In Gaza itself, the Hamas-run Civil Defence agency said Israeli strikes and gunfire killed at least 35 Palestinians on Saturday.

Seven people were killed, including a doctor and his three children, when tents in the al-Mawasi area were bombed, according to a hospital in the nearby city of Khan Younis.

Meanwhile, two American employees of the controversial aid distribution organisation backed by Israel and the US – the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) – were wounded in what it said was a grenade attack at its site in the Khan Younis area.

The Israeli and US governments both blamed Hamas, which has not commented.

Late on Saturday, the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office said in a statement that “the changes that Hamas is seeking to make” to the ceasefire proposal were “unacceptable to Israel”.

But it added: “In light of an assessment of the situation, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has directed that the invitation to proximity talks be accepted and that the contacts for the return of our hostages – on the basis of the Qatari proposal that Israel has agreed to – be continued. The negotiating team will leave tomorrow.”

Earlier, an Israeli official had briefed local media that there was “something to work with” in the way that Hamas had responded.

Mediators are likely to have their work cut out to bridge the remaining gaps at the indirect talks in Doha.

Watching them closely will be US President Donald Trump, who has been talking up the chances of an agreement in recent days.

On Friday, before he was briefed on Hamas’s response, he said it was “good” that the group was positive and that “there could be a Gaza deal next week”.

Trump is due to meet Netanyahu on Monday, and it is clear that he would very much like to be able to announce a significant breakthrough then.

The families of Israeli hostages and Palestinians in Gaza will also once again be holding their breath.

Hostages’ relatives and thousands of their supporters attended a rally in Tel Aviv on Saturday night to call for a comprehensive deal that would bring home all of the hostages.

Among those who spoke was Yechiel Yehoud. His daughter Arbel Yehoud was released from captivity during the last ceasefire, which Trump helped to broker before he took office and which collapsed when Israel resumed its offensive in March.

“President Trump, thank you for bringing our Arbel back to us. We will be indebted to you for the rest of our lives. Please don’t stop, please make a ‘big beautiful hostages deal’,” he said.

On Tuesday, the US president said that Israel had accepted the “necessary conditions” for a 60-day ceasefire, during which the parties would work to end the war.

The plan is believed to include the staggered release of 10 living Israeli hostages by Hamas and the bodies of 18 other hostages in exchange for Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails.

Fifty hostages are still being held in Gaza, at least 20 of whom are believed to be alive.

The proposal also reportedly says sufficient quantities of aid would enter Gaza immediately with the involvement of the UN and the International Committee of the Red Cross.

A senior Palestinian official familiar with the talks told the BBC on Friday that Hamas was demanding aid be distributed exclusively by the UN and its partners, and that the GHF’s operations end immediately.

Another amendment demanded by Hamas was about Israeli troop withdrawals, according to the official.

The US proposal is believed to include phased Israeli pull-outs from parts of Gaza. But the official said Hamas wanted troops to return to the positions they held before the last ceasefire collapsed in March, when Israel resumed its offensive.

The official said Hamas also wanted a US guarantee that Israeli air and ground operations would not resume even if the ceasefire ended without a permanent truce.

The proposal is believed to say mediators will guarantee that serious negotiations will take place from day one, and that they can extend the ceasefire if necessary.

The Israeli prime minister has ruled out ending the war until all of the hostages are released and Hamas’s military and governing capabilities are destroyed.

Far-right members of his cabinet have also expressed their opposition to the proposed deal.

National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir said on Saturday that the only way to secure the return of the hostages was the “full conquest of the Gaza Strip, a complete halt to so-called ‘humanitarian’ aid, and the encouragement of emigration” of the Palestinian population.

The Israeli military launched a campaign in Gaza in response to the 7 October 2023 attack, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 others were taken hostage.

At least 57,338 people have been killed in Gaza since then, according to the territory’s Hamas-run health ministry.

Sabrina Carpenter brought her signature sugary pop sound to a crowd of 65,000 at London’s BST Festival on Saturday night.

The 26-year-old has built a brand around sexual confidence and racy lyrics, which were noticeably toned down as the US singer embraced a more family friendly show in London’s Hyde Park.

At one point a graphic flashed up on screen advising “parental discretion” as Carpenter launched into album track Bed Chem. She ditched her usual sexually suggestive performance on song Juno and instead used a cannon to fire t-shirts into the crowd.

Despite these changes she was still at her best, storming through a 17-song tracklist that comprised her biggest hits, charming the crowd with her Hollywood smile and incredibly bouncy hair.

Carpenter writes music for women of the dating app generation and her songs are filled with the type of anecdotes you’ve heard over Friday night drinks with the girls – from the anger over not getting closure to the fear of a man embarrassing you when they meet all your friends.

Perhaps that is what makes her so relatable. She’s a talented singer and dancer who shot to fame on the Disney Channel, but she could also so easily be your mate who brings over ice cream when you’re going through a break-up.

Her ability to switch from a sassy upbeat dance number to a vulnerable, acoustic solo performance is also impressive.

She’s an accomplished performer for someone whose breakout hit, Espresso, is little over a year old. But much to the surprise of many, she’s been in this game for a very long time.

The Pennsylvania-born star began posting videos of herself on YouTube at the age of 10 and came third in a competition to find the next Miley Cyrus a year later.

After starring in a few small acting roles, the singer became a bona fide Disney star in 2013 when she was cast in TV series Girl Meets World.

She began releasing music the following year and has released six albums to date, but has only recently received global recognition.

Carpenter became the first female artist to hold both the number one and number two positions on the UK singles chart for three consecutive weeks in 2024 and she also became the first artist in 71 years to spend 20 weeks at the top of the charts with Espresso.

From watching her live, it appears she’s been waiting patiently for this moment for quite some time, to perform on the biggest stages around the world and to thousands of fans – something she references a few times between songs.

She told the crowd she was “so, so grateful” that the audience had chosen to spend their Saturday evening with her, gushing that “London is so fun and there’s so much to do here”.

Much of the cheekiness she has built her brand on was weaved in throughout her performance, including 1950s style infomercials advertising sprays that erase no-good men from your life and mattresses that are perfect for “activities”.

But aside from a racy rendition of Bed Chem and a snippet of Pony by Ginuine (one for the Magic Mike fans) the show was more PG than expected.

Perhaps it was due to the large volume of young children stood in the crowd amongst us Gen Zs and millennials.

Or perhaps the pop princess needs a break from making headlines.

The first was back in March, when her Brit Awards opening performance was criticised for being too racy for pre-watershed television.

Media watchdog Ofcom received more than 800 complaints, with the majority relating to Carpenter’s choreography with dancers dressed in Beefeater outfits.

Then in June this year she was once again under fire for sharing artwork for her new album, Man’s Best Friend, which showed her on her hands and knees in a short dress whilst an anonymous man in a suit grabbed her hair.

Carpenter then revealed alternative artwork she said was “approved by God” and shows her holding the arm of a suited man.

Criticism for the original artwork came from charities including Glasgow Women’s Aid which supports victims of domestic abuse. It said Carpenter’s album cover was “regressive” and “promotes an element of violence and control”.

Heather Binning of Women’s Rights Network, also told the BBC that violence against women should “never be used as satire”.

But what Saturday’s performance showed is that Carpenter is a true professional, someone who can easily adapt both her style and setlist to cater to different audiences.

She ended the show perfectly, taking to a crane that panned across the huge mass of people, thrilling fans and giving them the opportunity for a close-up video to post on their social media.

“Damn nobody showed up,” she joked, adding: “London thank you so much for having us tonight, this has to be one of the biggest shows I’ve played in my entire life.”

She wrapped up with Espresso, marking the end of the show by downing some in martini-form from a crystal glass.

There were a few mutters from the crowd, who perhaps were expecting a special guest or two, but it was clear from the offset that this would be a defining moment in the popstar’s career and one where she only wants the spotlight on her.

Foreign Secretary David Lammy has become the first UK minister to visit Syria since the uprising that led to the country’s civil war began 14 years ago.

Lammy met Syria’s interim president Ahmad al-Sharaa eight months after the collapse of the Assad regime and as the new Islamic-led government continues to establish control within the country.

Alongside the visit, the UK government announced an additional £94.5m support package to cover humanitarian aid and support longer-term recovery within Syria and countries helping Syrian refugees.

Lammy told the BBC the purpose of his meeting was to promote inclusivity, transparency and accountability with the new government.

“I’m here to speak to this new government, to urge them to continue to be inclusive, to ensure that there’s transparency and accountability in the way that they govern,” he said.

“But [also] to stand by the Syrian people and Syria as it makes this peaceful transition over the coming months.”

Syria is in a fragile situation with a new Islamic-led government in charge.

In December, rebels led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, a group which has been proscribed as a terrorist organisation by the UK, UN and US, stormed Damascus, toppling the Assad regime which had ruled the country for 54 years.

Since then, Western countries have sought to reset relations with the country.

At the end of June, US President Donald Trump signed an executive order ending sanctions against the country.

The White House said at the time it would monitor the new Syrian government’s actions including by “addressing foreign terrorists” and “banning Palestinian terrorist groups”.

The UK has also lifted sanctions.

Al-Sharaa met French President Emmanuel Macron in Paris in May while other foreign officials, including Ukraine’s foreign minister, have visited Syria.

Many members of Syria’s new government, including the interim president, were members of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham.

Asked how the government deals with a group it had listed on the proscribed terror group as a pseudonym for al-Qaeda, Lammy said he recognised the country has a bloody recent history associated with terrorism and war, but said the UK is looking “to the future” and engaging with the new government.

Various violent attacks against minority groups have been committed in Syria in recent months.

Hundreds have been killed from the Alawite minority, there were violent attacks on the Druze community, and recently a brutal attack on peaceful worshippers inside a church in Damascus.

Internationally, these attacks have prompted concern about how much Syria’s new government can protect minorities but also provide safety and stability.

Almost every day, there are reported cases of killing or kidnapping.

Lammy said: “It’s important that the UK lean in to ensure that the balance is tipped in the right direction, a balance towards accountability, transparency, inclusivity for all of the communities that make up this country, a prosperous one and a peaceful one.”

Within Syria, many people are worried the government is slipping towards a new form of dictatorship.

There are restrictions on social freedoms, the role of women is being marginalised in the government, and there is more and more enforcement of Islamic practices rather than a clear governance based on civic codes representing the whole society.

In these early days of the government there are also fears around how it is being formed.

Only one female minister has been appointed and al-Sharaa has made almost every other appointment – with no election, referendum or opinion polls.

Many appointments in the government are reported to be based on connections rather than qualifications, and most of those in charge have a radical Islamic agenda and are enforcing it.

Lammy said the UK wants Syria to “move in the direction of peace, of prosperity, of stability for the people and an inclusive country” and will use humanitarian aid to help that.

He added the UK would monitor the situation to ensure the new government ruled the population in an inclusive manner.

The UK government is also supporting the Organisation of the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) to help dismantle Assad’s chemical weapons in Syria.

A further £2m was committed to the organisation this financial year in addition to around £837,000 provided since the fall of Assad.

There are many challenges ahead of Syria – both internally and in the region.

Israel has invaded parts of Syria and carried out hundreds of air strikes, and continues to hold hundreds of square kilometres inside Syrian territory.

Lammy said he “urged the Israeli government to think again about some of their actions” to avoid undermining “the progress that could be made in this new Syria”.

Hundreds of foreign fighters and their families have been held in detention camps in north-west Syria for years, including dozens from the UK.

Asked whether the UK was going to take them back home, Lammy did not give a clear answer.

He said he had discussed the issue of camps with Syria’s president, as well as how to help the country deal with counterterrorism and irregular migration.

The situation in Syria remains precarious, and its security is at risk with threats from the Islamic State group and radical jihadist fighters who have joined the government.

While international support will certainly help the war-torn country recover, it could also help pressure the government to be a representative of a diverse and open society.

Elon Musk says he is launching a new political party, weeks after dramatically falling out with US President Donald Trump.

The billionaire announced on his social media platform X that he had set up the America Party, billing it as a challenge to the Republican and Democratic two-party system.

However, it is unclear if the party has been formally registered with US election authorities. Musk, who was born outside of the US and is thus ineligible to run for the US presidency, does not say who will lead it.

He first raised the prospect of forming a party during his public feud with Trump, which saw him leave his role in the administration and engage in a vicious public spat with his former ally.

During that row, Musk posted a poll on X asking users if there should be a new political party in the US.

Referencing that poll in his post on Saturday, Musk wrote: “By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it!

“When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy.

“Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom.”

As of Saturday, the Federal Electoral Commission had not published documents indicating the party had been formally registered.

While there have been high-profile players outside the traditional two-party system in US politics, it is difficult for them to gain strong enough nationwide popularity to pose a real threat.

In the presidential election last year, candidates from the likes of Libertarian Party, the Green Party and the People’s Party all tried in vain to stop Trump or his Democratic rival, Kamala Harris, from winning.

Musk was until recently a core supporter of Trump, dancing alongside him during election rallies last year and bringing his four-year-old son to meet Trump in the Oval Office.

He was also Trump’s key financial backer: Musk spent $250m (£187m) to help him regain office.

After the election, he was appointed to lead the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (Doge), which was tasked with identifying swingeing cuts in the federal budget.

His fallout with Trump began when he left the administration in May and publicly criticised Trump’s tax and spending plans.

The legislation – which Trump has called his “big, beautiful bill” – was narrowly passed by Congress and signed into law by the president this week.

The massive law includes huge spending commitments and tax cuts, and is estimated to add more than $3tn to the US deficit over the next decade.

Crucially for Musk, who owns electric-vehicle giant Tesla, Trump’s bill does not focus on green transition or subsidies for products like Teslas.

“Elon may get more subsidy than any human being in history, by far,” Trump wrote on his social media site, Truth Social, this week. “Without subsidies, Elon would probably have to close up shop and head back home to South Africa.”

Trump threatened to have Doge look into subsidies in favour of Musk’s companies, alluding also to the billionaire’s other businesses.

Musk also owns SpaceX, which launches rockets for the US government, and Starlink, which provides satellite service for US and European defence forces.

Asked last month whether he was planning to join Israel in attacking Iran, US President Donald Trump said “I may do it. I may not do it. Nobody knows what I’m going to do”.

He let the world believe he had agreed a two-week pause to allow Iran to resume negotiations. And then he bombed anyway.

A pattern is emerging: The most predictable thing about Trump is his unpredictability. He changes his mind. He contradicts himself. He is inconsistent.

“[Trump] has put together a highly centralised policy-making operation, arguably the most centralised, at least in the area of foreign policy, since Richard Nixon,” says Peter Trubowitz, professor of international relations at the London School of Economics.

“And that makes policy decisions more dependent on Trump’s character, his preferences, his temperament.”

Trump has put this to political use; he has made his own unpredictability a key strategic and political asset. He has elevated unpredictability to the status of a doctrine. And now the personality trait he brought to the White House is driving foreign and security policy.

It is changing the shape of the world.

Political scientists call this the Madman Theory, in which a world leader seeks to persuade his adversary that he is temperamentally capable of anything, to extract concessions. Used successfully it can be a form of coercion and Trump believes it is paying dividends, getting the US’s allies where he wants them.

But is it an approach that can work against enemies? And could its flaw be that rather than being a sleight of hand designed to fool adversaries, it is in fact based on well established and clearly documented character traits, with the effect that his behaviour becomes easier to predict?

Trump began his second presidency by embracing Russian President Vladimir Putin and attacking America’s allies. He insulted Canada by saying it should become the 51st state of the US.

He said he was prepared to consider using military force to annex Greenland, an autonomous territory of America’s ally Denmark. And he said the US should retake ownership and control of the Panama Canal.

Article 5 of the Nato charter commits each member to come to the defence of all others. Trump threw America’s commitment to that into doubt. “I think Article 5 is on life support” declared Ben Wallace, Britain’s former defence secretary.

Conservative Attorney General Dominic Grieve said: “For now the trans-Atlantic alliance is over.”

A series of leaked text messages revealed the culture of contempt in Trump’s White House for European allies. “I fully share your loathing of European freeloaders,” US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth told his colleagues, adding “PATHETIC”.

In Munich earlier this year, Trump’s Vice-President JD Vance said the US would no longer be the guarantor of European security.

That appeared to turn the page on 80 years of trans-Atlantic solidarity. “What Trump has done is raise serious doubts and questions about the credibility of America’s international commitments,” says Prof Trubowitz.

“Whatever understanding those countries [in Europe] have with the United States, on security, on economic or other matters, they’re now subject to negotiation at a moment’s notice.

“My sense is that most people in Trump’s orbit think that unpredictability is a good thing, because it allows Donald Trump to leverage America’s clout for maximum gain…

“This is one of his takeaways from negotiating in the world of real estate.”

Trump’s approach paid dividends. Only four months ago, Sir Keir Starmer told the House of Commons that Britain would increase defence and security spending from 2.3% of GDP to 2.5%.

Last month, at a Nato summit, that had increased to 5%, a huge increase, now matched by every other member of the Alliance.

Trump is not the first American president to deploy an Unpredictability Doctrine. In 1968, when US President Richard Nixon was trying to end the war in Vietnam, he found the North Vietnamese enemy intractable.

“At one point Nixon said to his National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger, ‘you ought to tell the North Vietnamese negotiators that Nixon’s crazy and you don’t know what he’s going to do, so you better come to an agreement before things get really crazy’,” says Michael Desch, professor of international relations at Notre Dame University. “That’s the madman theory.”

Julie Norman, professor of politics at University College London, agrees that there is now an Unpredictability Doctrine.

“It’s very hard to know what’s coming from day to day,” she argues. “And that has always been Trump’s approach.”

Trump successfully harnessed his reputation for volatility to change the trans-Atlantic defence relationship. And apparently to keep Trump on side, some European leaders have flattered and fawned.

Last month’s Nato summit in The Hague was an exercise in obsequious courtship. Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte had earlier sent President Trump (or “Dear Donald”) a text message, which Trump leaked.

“Congratulations and thank you for your decisive action in Iran, it was truly extraordinary,” he wrote.

On the forthcoming announcement that all Nato members had agreed to increase defence spending to 5% of GDP, he continued: “You will achieve something NO president in decades could get done.”

Anthony Scaramucci, who previously served as Trump’s communications director in his first term, said: “Mr Rutte, he’s trying to embarrass you, sir. He’s literally sitting on Air Force One laughing at you.”

And this may prove to be the weakness at the heart of Trump’s Unpredictability Doctrine: their actions may be based on the idea that Trump craves adulation. Or that he seeks short-term wins, favouring them over long and complicated processes.

If that is the case and their assumption is correct, then it limits Trump’s ability to perform sleights of hand to fool adversaries – rather, he has well established and clearly documented character traits that they have become aware of.

Then there is the question of whether an Unpredictability Doctrine or the Madman Theory can work on adversaries.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, an ally who was given a dressing down by Trump and Vance in the Oval Office, later agreed to grant the US lucrative rights to exploit Ukrainian mineral resources.

Vladimir Putin, on the other hand, apparently remains impervious to Trump’s charms and threats alike. On Thursday, following a telephone call, Trump said he was “disappointed” that Putin was not ready to end the war against Ukraine.

And Iran? Trump promised his base that he would end American involvement in Middle Eastern “forever wars”. His decision to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities was perhaps the most unpredictable policy choice of his second term so far. The question is whether it will have the desired effect.

The former British Foreign Secretary, William Hague, has argued that it will do precisely the opposite: it will make Iran more, not less likely, to seek to acquire nuclear weapons.

Prof Desch agrees. “I think it’s now highly likely that Iran will make the decision to pursue a nuclear weapon,” he says. “So I wouldn’t be surprised if they lie low and do everything they can to complete the full fuel cycle and conduct a [nuclear] test.

“I think the lesson of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi is not lost on other dictators facing the US and potential regime change…

“So the Iranians will desperately feel the need for the ultimate deterrent and they’ll look at Saddam and Gaddafi as the negative examples and Kim Jong Un of North Korea as the positive example.”

One of the likely scenarios is the consolidation of the Islamic Republic, according to Mohsen Milani, a professor of politics at the University of South Florida and author of Iran’s Rise and Rivalry with the US in the Middle East.

“In 1980, when Saddam Hussein attacked Iran his aim was the collapse of the Islamic Republic,” he says. “The exact opposite happened.

“That was the Israeli and American calculation too… That if we get rid of the top guys, Iran is going to surrender quickly or the whole system is going to collapse.”

Looking ahead, unpredictability may not work on foes, but it is unclear whether the recent shifts it has yielded among allies can be sustained.

Whilst possible, this is a process built largely on impulse. And there may be a worry that the US could be seen as an unreliable broker.

“People won’t want to do business with the US if they don’t trust the US in negotiations, if they’re not sure the US will stand by them in defence and security issues,” argues Prof Norman. “So the isolation that many in the MAGA world seek is, I think, going to backfire.”

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz for one has said Europe now needs to become operationally independent of the US.

“The importance of the chancellor’s comment is that it’s a recognition that US strategic priorities are changing,” says Prof Trubowitz. “They’re not going to snap back to the way they were before Trump took office.

“So yes, Europe is going to have to get more operationally independent.”

This would require European nations to develop a much bigger European defence industry, to acquire kit and capabilities that currently only the US has, argues Prof Desch. For example, the Europeans have some sophisticated global intelligence capability, he says, but a lot of it is provided by the US.

“Europe, if it had to go it alone, would also require a significant increase in its independent armaments production capability,” he continues. “Manpower would also be an issue. Western Europe would have to look to Poland to see the level of manpower they would need.”

All of which will take years to build up.

So, have the Europeans really been spooked by Trump’s unpredictability, into making the most dramatic change to the security architecture of the western world since the end of the Cold War?

“It has contributed,” says Prof Trubowitz. “But more fundamentally, Trump has uncorked something… Politics in the United States has changed. Priorities have changed. To the MAGA coalition, China is a bigger problem than Russia. That’s maybe not true for the Europeans.”

And according to Prof Milani, Trump is trying to consolidate American power in the global order.

“It’s very unlikely that he’s going to change the order that was established after World War Two. He wants to consolidate America’s position in that order because China is challenging America’s position in that order.”

But this all means that the defence and security imperatives faced by the US and Europe are diverging.

The European allies may be satisfied that through flattery and real policy shifts, they have kept Trump broadly onside; he did, after all, reaffirm his commitment to Article 5 at the most recent Nato summit. But the unpredictability means this cannot be guaranteed – and they have seemed to accept that they can no longer complacently rely on the US to honour its historic commitment to their defence.

And in that sense, even if the Unpredictability Doctrine comes from a combination of conscious choice and Trump’s very real character traits, it is working, on some at least.

Ozzy Osbourne and Black Sabbath have gone out with a bang at what they say will be their final gig, in front of 40,000 fans and supported by an all-star line-up of rock legends who have been influenced by the founding fathers of heavy metal.

Ozzy, 76, who has Parkinson’s disease, sang while seated on a black throne – clapping, waving his arms and pulling wild-eyed looks, just like old times.

He appeared overwhelmed at some moments. “You have no idea how I feel. Thank you from the bottom of my heart,” he told the crowd at Villa Park in Birmingham.

He was joined by the full original Sabbath line-up for the first time in 20 years.

The show’s bill also included fellow rock gods Metallica, Guns N’ Roses, Slayer, the Rolling Stones’ Ronnie Wood and Aerosmith’s Steven Tyler.

Wearing a leather overcoat and gold armband bearing his name, Ozzy rose from below the stage in his throne to a huge roar from the crowd.

“Are you ready? Let the madness begin,” he called.

“It’s so good to be on this stage. You have no idea,” he told the crowd, who responded by chanting his name.

After playing five songs from his solo career, Ozzy was joined by his Sabbath bandmates – guitarist Tony Iommi, bassist and lyricist Geezer Butler, and drummer Bill Ward – for four more, finishing with 1970 classic Paranoid.

The Parkinson’s, other health problems and age have taken their toll, meaning he performed sitting down throughout. His voice wavered a bit but still packed a fair punch.

Fans came from all over the world – if they could get tickets – for the all-day Back to the Beginning gig at Aston Villa’s football stadium, a stone’s throw from Ozzy’s childhood home.

The star-studded show was dubbed the “heavy metal Live Aid”, and profits will go to charity.

The pitch was a sea of Black Sabbath T-shirts and rock hand signs, with some areas becoming a melee of moshing. One person waved an inflatable bat, a reference to the infamous 1982 incident when Ozzy bit the head off a live bat on stage – the most notorious moment of many in the rock star’s wild career.

The day’s other performers paid homage to him and the other band members.

“Without Sabbath there would be no Metallica,” the US group’s frontman James Hetfield told the crowd during their set. “Thank you for giving us a purpose in life.”

Guns N’ Roses’ appearance included a cover of Sabbath’s 1978 song Never Say Die, with frontman Axl Rose ending with the cry: “Birmingham! Ozzy! Sabbath! Thank you!”

A series of star-studded supergroups saw Tyler, who has suffered serious vocal problems in recent years, sound back on form as part of a band including Ronnie Wood, Blink-182’s Travis Barker and Rage Against the Machine’s Tom Morello.

Another version of the band included Smashing Pumpkins singer Billy Corgan and KK Downing from Judas Priest, another of the West Midlands’ original metal heroes.

Younger performers included Yungblud, who sang one of Sabbath’s more tender songs, Changes, originally released in 1972, and which Ozzy took to number one as a duet with daughter Kelly in 2003.

Yungblud was part of another supergroup whose revolving cast of musicians included members of Megadeth, Faith No More and Anthrax.

There was also a titanic battle of three drummers in a “drum-off” between Barker, Chad Smith from the Red Hot Chili Peppers and Danny Carey of Tool.

Pantera frontman Phil Anselmo told the crowd the artists on the bill “would all be different people” without Black Sabbath. “That’s the truth. I wouldn’t be up here with this microphone in my hand without Black Sabbath. The greatest of all time.”

Hollywood actor Jason Momoa was the show’s compere and while introducing Pantera, told fans he was joining the moshpit, saying: “Make some space for me, I’m coming in.”

At another point, he told the crowd: “The history of Black Sabbath and Ozzy Osbourne is to look back at the best who’ve ever done it. We have some of the greatest rock and metal musicians ever here today on this stage.”

Momoa’s Minecraft Movie co-star Jack Black sent a video message, as did other big names ranging from Billy Idol to Dolly Parton.

“Black Sabbath really kind of started all this, the metal era,” former Van Halen frontman Sammy Hagar told BBC News backstage. “Everyone looks at them like the kings, and if the kings are going to go out then we’re going to go honour them.

“Everyone that was asked to do this, shoot, you drop everything and do this. This is going to go down in history as the greatest metal event of all of all time.”

Ozzy said beforehand that the show would be “a goodbye as far as my live performances go, and what a way to go out”.

The line-up of legends “means everything”, he said in an interview provided by organisers.

“I am forever in their debt for showing up for me and the fans. I can’t quite put it into words, but I feel very emotional and blessed.”

Ticket prices ranged from about £200 to £2,000, with profits being shared between Cure Parkinson’s, Birmingham Children’s Hospital and Acorn Children’s Hospice.

Back to the Beginning line-up:

• Black Sabbath
• Ozzy Osbourne solo
• Metallica
• Guns N’ Roses
• Slayer
• Tool
• Pantera
• Supergroup including Billy Corgan (Smashing Pumpkins), Ronnie Wood (the Rolling Stones), Steven Tyler (Aerosmith), Adam Jones (Tool), KK Downing (Judas Priest), Vernon Reid (Living Colour), Chad Smith (Red Hot Chili Peppers), Sammy Hagar (Van Halen), Tom Morello (Rage Against the Machine), Travis Barker (Blink-182) and Tobias Forge (Ghost)
• Drum-off – Chad Smith (Red Hot Chili Peppers), Travis Barker (Blink-182) and Danny Carey (Tool)
• Gojira
• Alice in Chains
• Anthrax
• Supergroup including Lizzy Hale (Halestorm), David Ellefson (Megadeth), Mike Bordin (Faith No More), David Draiman (Disturbed), Scott Ian (Anthrax), Yungblud and Nuno Bettencourt (Extreme)
• Lamb of God
• Halestorm
• Rival Sons
• Mastodon

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has made his first public appearance since the start of Iran’s conflict with Israel, according to state media.

State television footage showed him greeting worshippers at a mosque on Saturday during a ceremony a day before the Shia festival of Ashura.

Khamenei’s last appearance was in a recorded address during the conflict with Israel, which began on 13 June and during which top Iranian commanders and nuclear scientists were killed.

Israel launched a surprise attack on nuclear and military sites in Iran, after which Iran retaliated with aerial attacks targeting Israel.

• When Iran’s supreme leader emerges from hiding he will find a very different nation

During the 12-day war with Israel, Khamenei appeared on TV in three video messages and there was speculation that he was hiding in a bunker.

On Saturday Iranian media coverage was dominated by Khamenei’s appearance, with footage of supporters expressing joy at seeing him on television.

Khamenei is seen turning to senior cleric Mahmoud Karimi, encouraging him to “sing the anthem, O Iran”. The patriotic song became particularly popular during the recent conflict with Israel.

State TV said the clip was filmed at Tehran’s Imam Khomeini Mosque, named after the founder of the Islamic republic.

Iranian TV has invited people to send in videos sharing their reactions to Khamenei’s return to the public eye.

His appearance comes as the predominantly Shia Muslim country observes a period of mourning during the month of Muharram, traditionally attended by the supreme leader.

Ashura is held on the 10th day of Muharram – this year falling on 6 July – during which Shia Muslims commemorate the death of Prophet Muhammad’s grandson, Hossein.

On 26 June, in pre-recorded remarks aired on state television, Khamenei said Iran would not surrender to Israel despite US President Donald Trump’s calls.

The US joined the war with strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities on 22 June.

The operation involved 125 US military aircraft and targeted three nuclear facilities: Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan.

Iran’s judiciary said more than 900 people were killed during the 12-day war.

Colombian police have arrested the alleged mastermind of the assassination attempt against a presidential hopeful during a rally last month.

Miguel Uribe, a conservative senator, was twice shot in the head in the capital, Bogotá, as he was campaigning for his party’s nomination in the 2026 presidential election.

Police arrested a suspected criminal, Élder José Arteaga Hernandez, who they say persuaded a 15-year-old to carry out the attack. Four other people had already been arrested, including the teenager charged with shooting Uribe.

Uribe remains in a critical condition. The motive for the attempt on his life on 7 June is unclear.

• Colombia presidential hopeful shot in head at rally

Colombian police chief Carlos Fernando Triana said on Friday that Arteaga had a long criminal history and was wanted for “aggravated attempted homicide” and “use of minors for the commission of crimes” over the attack on Uribe.

Police say he co-ordinated the assault, hired the gunman and provided him with a weapon.

Authorities had previously accused Arteaga, who uses the aliases Chipi and Costeño, of being near the Bogotá park where Uribe was shot.

The 15-year-old suspect was arrested as he was fleeing the scene. He subsequently pleaded not guilty, the prosecutor’s office said.

Uribe, a critic of left-wing President Gustavo Petro, announced his candidacy for next year’s presidential election last October. The 39-year-old has been a senator since 2022.

He is from a prominent political family, with links to Colombia’s Liberal Party. His father was a union leader and businessman.

His mother, journalist Diana Turbay, was killed in 1991 in a rescue attempt after she was kidnapped by the Medellin drugs cartel.

The 7 June attack prompted silent protests attended by tens of thousands of Colombians.

On Saturday more than one million people are expected to attend Pride in London, the UK’s largest LGBTQ+ event.

But despite huge visitor numbers, organisers say the event – and others like it around the country – face an uncertain future due to a drop in funding and falling volunteer numbers.

More than 85 Pride organisations say they’ve seen a reduction in corporate sponsorships or partnerships, according to a questionnaire by the UK Pride Organisers Network (UKPON), which said it represents the majority of UK Pride events.

Some celebrations have already been cancelled or postponed, while others are scaling back plans or charging for tickets to what have previously been free-to-attend events.

The UK’s Pride movement began in 1972 when a group called the Gay Liberation Front (GLF) decided that, as well as protesting, it was also important to celebrate the community.

At the time, same-sex couples showing affection in public could have seen them arrested.

Now, Pride events take part across the world, often combining protest, in the form of marches and rallies, with parties and live entertainment.

BBC News has spoken to a number of Pride organisers about their worries for the future of Pride events, and what they believe is behind the drop in funding.

Dee Llewellyn is volunteer chair of UKPON, and also works full-time as Pride in London’s head of partnerships.

She believes that, for large-scale celebrations such as in Pride in London, international corporations moving away from Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) policies is one of the driving forces behind the drop in donations.

She said: “There’s an old saying, if America sneezes, then the UK catches a cold, and I think we’re really feeling that right now.

“Global corporations, with head offices based in America, have had their DEI funding cut, which has meant that some corporations, even ones that have been really long-standing supporters of Pride in the UK, have no longer got a budget to do so.”

Despite the difficulties it faces, London continues to be the UK’s largest Pride event and over the past few years attendance has grown to 1.5 million people, making it one of the city’s largest public events.

According to the Pride in London website, the cost of their 2024 event was £1.7m.

Asked why a Pride event – which is seen by many as a form of protest first and foremost – costs this much to run, Dee told the BBC: “It’s about making safe spaces, not just emotionally safe but physically safe for everybody there as well – it means paying for security staff, barriers, road closures.

“As Pride grows, and the numbers grow, the cost and the level of health and safety and other infrastructure grows as well. No Pride would be able to go ahead without meeting those health and safety regulations.”

Although the focus this weekend will be very much on the capital, UKPON told the BBC that Pride events up and down the country are facing similar issues.

In April UKPON asked its 201 members whether they were facing any financial or operational pressures.

Of the 112 organisations that responded:

• More than 85 reported lost revenue from corporate sponsorships and partnerships this year
• More than 40 said that the drop was between 26% – 50% compared to last year
• 21 said they’d experienced their revenue fall by more than half in that same period
• More than 60 said they’d seen reductions in grants from corporations or charities

In recent weeks, several Pride organisations have taken the decision to cancel events.

Liverpool City Region Pride announced in June that rising costs and difficulty securing funding “made it impossible to bring Pride to Liverpool this year”.

Another charity has since stepped in to organise an alternative event.

Plymouth Pride, which organisers say usually has an estimated 6,000-7,000 attendees, will this year also not go ahead in its official capacity.

Organisers told the BBC they were £12,000 short of the estimated £35,000 it costs to put on their annual event, which includes a march through the city and a number of stages showing entertainment.

Alex MacDonald, chair of Plymouth Pride, told the BBC that rising costs for things like security, first aid and toilet facilities, combined with a drop in grant funding, had left the organisation with no choice but to cancel the official event.

He said: “Ultimately it was [grant] funding that was the make or break for us and this year it didn’t work.

“I’m just absolutely gutted because I think it’s more important this year to have Pride than any other year.”

A smaller group, Plymouth Community Pride, has now raised funds to host an alternative event in the city.

“We’ve been very lucky this year, the community rallied together and a separate organisation is putting on lots of little events. We’ll hopefully come back bigger and stronger next year,” Alex added.

In June, more than 6,000 people attended The Pink Picnic, an event organised by a team of volunteers from Salford Pride in the city’s Peel Park.

Started in 2011, it’s marketed by organisers as a small, community-focused Pride event and is seen as a quieter alternative to Manchester Pride, a ticketed multi-day event with celebrity headliners which takes place a few miles down the road.

In 2025, Salford Pride took the decision to charge for tickets for the first time in order to plug what they say was a £40,000 shortfall in sponsorships from corporate partners.

The team, made up entirely of volunteers, decided to charge £5 per ticket, but estimate that the event costs around £18 per head.

Reece Holmes, event lead for Salford Pride, said it was “one of the most difficult decisions” his team of volunteers have had to make and that it led to some “being subjected to quite a lot of abuse online.”

Despite The Pink Picnic being a relatively small event, costs such as security and stewards – which Reece said are essential to run a public event – mean it costs around £100,000 a year to run.

He told the BBC: “We’ve had a 28% increase in costs from 2024, but we’ve also lost three corporate sponsors since then.

“It’s a mixture of economic issues and I think the political climate at the minute, I think [companies] are a little bit scared to support Prides.”

Reece said that without charging for tickets to cover some of the costs, the event would not have been able to go ahead.

“We’re being forced to make these kinds of decisions due to a lack of funding, due to economic issues and due to the political climate.”

Although many Prides have told the BBC they are struggling financially, and may have to scale back or charge more for events in the future, Dee Llewellyn said there is “no chance” Pride as a movement will stop.

She added: “We need to remember that we as a community are incredibly resilient.

“We have always been resilient and we always will be, so while we might go through this ebb and flow, and we’ve fallen off a cliff this year with corporate partnerships, we will find ways around that.

“We are going to club together, stand together and be stronger and more united and we will come back stronger.”

Footballers Diogo Jota and André Silva have been honoured by their family, friends and teammates at a joint funeral in Portugal.

Jota, 28, was laid to rest alongside his brother, Silva, 25, after they died in a car crash on Thursday.

Hundreds of locals and supporters gathered at the Igreja Matriz in Gondomar, where the brothers are from, on Saturday.

The funeral also brought together huge names from across football, including Jota’s teammates Virgil van Dijk and Andy Robertson, who were seen carrying floral tributes into the church ahead of the ceremony.

The service was held in Gondomar, a small Portuguese city near Porto, that has been left reeling after the brothers died.

Jota and Silva died at about 00:30 local time in the Spanish province of Zamora.

It is understood they were on the way to take a ferry and return to Liverpool for Jota’s pre-season training when the accident happened.

The Portugal forward had undergone minor surgery and doctors had advised him against flying.

The accident came just 11 days after Jota married his long-term partner Rute Cardoso, with whom he had three children.

Players from Liverpool FC, who only three months ago were celebrating their Premier League win, arrived at the funeral together.

Watching them walk in line with each other, almost as they do when walking onto the pitch, was an emotional experience.

There was a strong feeling of community, but also a shared sombreness.

Many were visibly upset, with supporters on the other side of the barrier applauding the players. One woman in the crowd shouted towards them as they walked in: “Força!” – strength.

Family and close friends walked into the church in complete silence, many of them with their heads bowed down as the church bell rung.

One person in the procession held up a sign with Silva’s photograph, which read: “Para sempre um de nós.” (Forever one of us.)

So much was the brothers’ impact on football and their local community that some of the guests had to watch the ceremony from outside of the church, often hugging and comforting one another.

Locals and football fans in the crowd watched silently for most of the service, which went on for about an hour.

Many wore football shirts and carried merchandise from the different teams across Portugal and abroad where Jota and Silva, who played for local club Penafiel, spent some time in.

One of these fans was Antônio Moreira, who set off early in the morning to be one of the first outside the Igreja Matriz de Gondomar where the funeral took place.

“I know I won’t be able to go inside, but I wanted to pay my respects,” he told me from the barrier outside the church.

Antônio later showed me his phone case – a little old, he said – with the emblem of FC Porto.

Antônio recalled fond memories of Jota on the field, as he spent a year playing for the local club, but added that the brothers were so much more than football stars.

“They were good people, from a humble family, people like us.”

This has hit him especially hard, he said, as 40 years ago his family went through a similar tragedy. His aunt, uncle and young cousin died in a car accident three days before Christmas, leaving his other cousin behind.

Jota and Silva may not have been his direct family, he said, but their deaths felt personal.

“This is what I think: losing your parents is hard, really hard. But losing your children is unimaginable,” he added.

Jota’s journey as a player inspired many people here in Gondomar, football fan Fábio Silva told me.

He has kept up with the brothers since they started in the local clubs – and said he had to be here for their final journey.

“Despite the impact they had on football, and even financially, they never let it show,” he told me, adding the family are well-loved in the town.

“The community is sad, devastated,” he said.

Having spent some time with them over the years, Fábio said there was only one reason he was here: “Respect for the brothers, the family.”

Avid football fans Fábio and Rafaela travelled from the nearby town Lordelo to honour Jota and Silva.

Wearing Jota’s shirt, Fábio said it was important to him to be here “for Jota’s final day”. Both said it meant a lot to the community that so many people showed up to pay their respects.

They watched the ceremony from outside the church, like hundreds of other fans – which Fábio said was hard. Nodding, Rafaela agreed, but said it was also beautiful.

“This is an example that you need to live life to the max,” Rafaela said, “because you never know when will be your last day.”

“Say everything you want to say, and need to say – tomorrow could be too late,” Fábio added.

An eight-year-old girl and the director of an all-girls’ summer camp are among the victims of flash floods in Texas that have claimed at least 43 lives, including 15 children.

Officials say most of the victims have been identified, though the identities of six adults and a child remain unknown. Authorities have not yet released any names publicly.

Here’s what we know so far about the victims.

Eight-year-old Renee Smajstrla was at Camp Mystic when flooding swept through the summer camp for girls, her uncle said in a Facebook post.

“Renee has been found and while not the outcome we prayed for, the social media outreach likely assisted the first responders in helping to identify her so quickly,” wrote Shawn Salta, of Maryland.

“We are thankful she was with her friends and having the time of her life, as evidenced by this picture from yesterday,” he wrote. “She will forever be living her best life at Camp Mystic.”

Camp Mystic, where 27 children are missing, is a nearly century-old Christian summer camp for girls on the banks of the Guadalupe River near Hunt, Texas.

Operated by generations of the same family since the 1930s, the camp’s website bills itself as a place for girls to grow “spiritually” in a “wholesome” Christian atmosphere “to develop outstanding personal qualities and self-esteem”.

Heart O’ the Hills is another all-girls’ camp that sits along the Guadalupe River, and it was right in the path of Friday’s flood.

Jane Ragsdale, described as the “heart and soul” of Heart O’Hills, “did not make it”, a post shared on the camp’s official website said on Saturday.

Ragsdale, who started off as a camper then a counsellor, became the director and co-owner of the camp in 1976.

“We are mourning the loss of a woman who influenced countless lives and was the definition of strong and powerful,” the camp website post said.

Heart O’ the Hills wasn’t in session and “most of those who were on camp at the time have been accounted for and are on high ground”, the statement said.

“Access to the site is difficult, and authorities are primarily focused on locating the missing and preventing further loss of life and property”.

Sarah Marsh, a student at Cherokee Bend Elementary School in Texas, would have entered third grade in August.

She, too, was attending Camp Mystic when the floods struck, and reported as missing along with about two dozen other campers.

Her grandmother, Debbie Ford Marsh, took to Facebook on Friday asking for prayers. Just hours later she shared online that her granddaughter was among the girls killed.

“We will always feel blessed to have had this beautiful spunky ray of light in our lives. She will live on in our hearts forever!” Ms Ford Marsh wrote on Facebook.

In a post on Facebook, Alabama Senator Katie Britt said she’s “heartbroken over the loss of Sarah Marsh, and we are keeping her family in our thoughts and prayers during this unimaginable time”.

Nine-year-old Lila Bonner, a Dallas native was found dead after flooding near Camp Mystic, according to NBC News.

“In the midst of our unimaginable grief, we ask for privacy and are unable to confirm any details at this time,” her family said in a statement to the news outlet.

“We ache with all who loved her and are praying endlessly.”

The warning signs were already flashing as hundreds of young people celebrated the Fourth of July public holiday at Camp Mystic, an all-girls’ Christian summer retreat, nestled on the banks of the Guadalupe River in Texas.

There had not been a drop of rain in the area recently until the inundation, when the river rose 26ft (8m) in less than an hour, according to state officials.

By Saturday evening, at least 51 people were dead, including 15 children.

• Search for missing continues
• Texas flood victims: Girl ‘living her best life’ and ‘heart and soul’ of camp

The first hint of the devastation to come appeared on Thursday morning as rain and thunderstorms soaked a number of central Texas counties.

The National Weather Service (NWS) issued a common warning called a flood watch at 13:18 that afternoon for parts of the region, including Kerr County.

In the early hours of Friday, the outlook became more dire as the NWS issued a series of upgraded warnings. The San Saba river, the Concho River and the Colorado River were rising.

At 04:03, the NWS sent a “particularly dangerous situation” alert, reserved for the most urgent and potentially deadly scenarios such as wildfires.

Another “particularly dangerous situation” warning was issued for the city of Kerrville at 05:34, before dawn on Friday.

“Residents and campers should SEEK HIGHER GROUND NOW! Life threatening flash flooding along the river is expected,” forecasters said.

“Automated rain gauges indicate a large and deadly flood wave is moving down the Guadalupe River. Flash flooding is already occurring.”

Such alerts are shared on NWS social media accounts and by broadcast news outlets, but most people were asleep.

Elinor Lester, 13, said younger campers at Camp Mystic were bunked in cabins closer to the riverbank and those were the first to flood.

“The camp was completely destroyed,” Elinor, who was evacuated by helicopter, told the Associated Press news agency. “It was really scary.”

Just outside Kerrville, the BBC met Jonathan and Brittany Rojas as they came to see what was left of a relative’s home. Only the foundations remain.

Five people were in the house the night of the deluge – the mother and her baby are still missing.

The teenage son, Leo, survived after he became snared in barbed wire, preventing him from being swept away. The boy is recovering in hospital.

As the BBC was interviewing the Rojas couple, a neighbour walked up to present them with an item salvaged from the house.

It was the teenager’s money jar. The label on it read, “Leo’s survival kit”.

Desperate Camp Mystic parents took to social media looking for news of their children.

One Facebook group – Kerrville Breaking News – turned into a missing persons page.

Some parents have since updated their social media pleas to say their missing family members did not survive.

Kerr County is in the heart of the Texas Hill Country, a getaway destination because of its scenic rolling hills, countless rivers and lakes and abundance of wineries.

But the region is also known as “Flash Flood Alley”, because of the recurring threat that has devastated local communities over the years.

When asked why the riverside summer camp was not evacuated, officials said the sudden scale of the deluge caught them unawares.

“No-one knew this kind of flood was coming,” Kerr County Judge Rob Kelly said.

Two decades have passed since the 2005 London attacks, but the face of the lead suicide bomber, Mohammad Sidique Khan, has never left Dan Biddle’s memory.

It feels as real today as the day they looked into each other’s eyes.

“I can be in in the kitchen and he is stood in the garden,” says Dan, who has complex post-traumatic stress disorder.

“He’s there, dressed as he was on the day, holding the rucksack, just with his hand above it, about to detonate it again.”

Even if Dan looks away, the bomber is still there when he looks back.

“I saw this guy literally disassemble himself in front of me, and now I’m seeing him again.”

• 7 July London bombings: What happened that day?

Dan was in touching distance of Khan, on a rush-hour London Underground Circle line train on 7 July 2005. How he survived is almost beyond rational explanation.

“As as we pulled out of Edgware Road station, I could feel somebody staring at me. I was just about to turn around and say, ‘What are you looking at?’, and I see him put his hand in the bag.

“And then there was a just a brilliantly white, bright flash – heat like I’ve never experienced before.”

Khan had detonated a homemade bomb – made using an al-Qaeda-devised chemical recipe – that he was carrying in his rucksack.

The device killed David Foulkes, 22, Jennifer Nicholson, 24, Laura Webb, 29, Jonathan Downey, 34, Colin Morley and Michael Brewster, both 52.

In total, 52 people were killed that day, by four bombs detonated by Islamist extremists. Another 770 were injured.

Dan was blown out of the train, hit the tunnel wall and fell into the crawl space between the tunnel wall and the track.

His injuries were catastrophic. His left leg was blown off. His right leg was severed from the knee down. He suffered second and third-degree burns to his arms, hands and face. He lost his left eye – and his hearing on that side too.

He suffered a massive laceration to his forehead. A pole from the tube train’s internal fittings went into his body and he endured punctures and ruptures to his kidneys, lungs, colon and bowel. He later lost his spleen.

Dan was the most severely injured victim of the attacks to survive. And he was conscious throughout.

He initially thought the white flash was an electrical explosion.

Debris had fallen onto him, and his arms and hands were alight. He could see the flames flickering.

“Straight after the explosion, you could have heard a pin drop. It was almost as if everybody had just taken a big breath,” Dan says, “and then it was like opening the gates of hell. Screaming like I’ve never heard before.”

Dan could see some of the dead. He tried to push down to lever himself up from the debris. He realised how profusely he was bleeding.

“The initial feeling was one of total disbelief. It was like, surely God, this is just a nightmare.”

Dan’s mind immediately turned to his father, and how he couldn’t bear for him to witness this.

“My dad cannot be the person that walks into a mortuary and goes, ‘Yeah, that’s my son’,” Dan says. “I couldn’t bear the thought of that.”

He didn’t believe he would get out of the tunnel. But the will to survive instinctively kicked in and he screamed for help.

The first person to respond was fellow passenger Adrian Heili, who had served as a combat medic during the Kosovo war. If it had been anyone else, Dan believes he would have died.

“The first thing he said to me was, ‘Don’t worry, I’ve been in this situation before, and never lost anyone.’

“And I’m thinking, ‘How can you have gone through this before?’

“And then he said to me: ‘I’m not going to lie to you. This is really going to hurt.'”

Adrian applied a tourniquet and pinched shut the artery in Dan’s thigh to stop him bleeding to death. Dan’s life was literally in Adrian’s hands until paramedics were able to reach him about half an hour later.

Adrian helped many more in the hours that followed – and in 2009 received the Queen’s Commendation for Bravery.

Dan’s trauma was far from over. He was taken to nearby St Mary’s Hospital where he repeatedly went into cardiac arrest. At one point, a surgeon had to manually massage his heart to bring him back to life. He was given 87 units of blood.

“I think there’s something in all of us – that fundamental desire to live.

“Very few people ever get pushed to the degree where that’s required.

“My survival is down to Adrian and the phenomenal care and just brilliance of the NHS and my wife.”

Physical survival was one thing. But the toll on Dan’s mental health was another.

After eight weeks in an induced coma, Dan began a year-long journey to leaving hospital – and he realised he’d have to navigate the world outside differently.

His nights became consumed with mental torture.

He dreaded having to close his eyes and go to sleep, because he would find himself back in the tunnel.

“I wake up and [the bomber] is standing next to me,” Dan says. “I’ll be driving – he’s in the back seat of my car. I’ll look in the shop window and there’s a reflection of him – on the other side of the street.”

Those flashbacks have led to what Dan describes as survivor’s guilt.

“I’ve replayed that moment a million times over in my head. Was there something about me that made him do it? Should I have seen something about him then tried to stop it?”

By 2013 Dan had reached a dangerous low. He tried to take his own life three times.

But he had also started a relationship with his now-wife Gem – and this was a crucial turning point.

The next time he came close to suicide it was Gem’s face he saw when he closed his eyes, and he realised that if he ended his own life he would inflict appalling trauma on her.

Gem persuaded Dan to take a mental health assessment – and he began to get the expert help he needed.

In 2014 he agreed – as part of his therapy and attempts to manage the condition – to do something he thought he would never do: return to Edgware Road.

When the day came, Dan sat outside the station experiencing flashbacks and hearing the sounds of 7/7 again: screams, shouting and sirens.

He and Gem pressed on. As they entered the ticket hall there were more flashbacks.

The station manager and staff were expecting him and asked if he wanted to go down to the platform. Dan said it was a “bridge too far”. Gem insisted they all go together.

When they reached the platform, a train pulled in. Dan began to feel sick. But the train quietly moved on without incident – and by the time a third train had arrived he found the courage to board it.

“I feel really, really sick. I’m sweating. She’s crying. I’m tensing, waiting for a blast. I’m waiting for that that big heat and that pressure to hit me.”

And then the train stopped at the point in the tunnel where the bomb had gone off – an arrangement between the driver and the station manager.

“They’d stopped the train exactly where I’d been lying. I remember looking down onto the floor and it was a really weird feeling – knowing that my life really came to an end there.”

As the train pulled away, something inside Dan urged him to get off at the next station and move forward with his life.

“I’m going to leave the station, I’m going to do whatever I’m going to do today, and then I’m going to marry this amazing, beautiful woman,” he says. The two tied the knot the following year.

Eleven years on, Dan feels driven to do something positive with his life.

He now runs his own company helping disabled people into work – a professional journey he might never have embarked on had it not been for the bomb.

He still has flashbacks and bad days but he’s finding ways to manage them – and has published a book of what he has been through.

“I’m very lucky to still be alive. I’ve paid an immense, enormous price. I’ll just keep fighting every day to make sure that him and his actions never win.”

Afrobeats has swept the world of music like a tsunami – it dominates playlists and its fans cram into huge stadiums to hear the likes of Nigerian superstars Wizkid, Davido and Burna Boy.

Photographer Oliver Akinfeleye, known professionally as “Drummer”, caught the Afrobeats wave early – and he decided to document it as it grew into a global phenomenon.

Since 2017, the New Yorker of Nigerian descent has had exclusive backstage access to some of the biggest artists of the genre – capturing quieter moments of reflection as well as strutting stage performances.

“I remember my first project with Wizkid like it was yesterday – Echostage Washington DC, 2017,” Drummer told the BBC. “The feeling was exhilarating. It was my job to tell the visual story of how it all went down.”

Drummer has not stopped clicking since – and has now released Eagle Eye, a book of photographs showcasing Afrobeats’ rise from humble beginnings to one of Africa’s largest cultural exports.

Afrobeats has its roots in various West African musical genres that became especially popular in the decades that followed independence as the continent began celebrating its freedom from colonial rule.

Highlife, which flourished along the coast from the late 19th Century, became synonymous with Ghana’s national identity after independence in 1957 – and was in turn hugely influential on Nigerian musician Fela Kuti. His Afrobeat (minus the “s”) movement, which mixed traditional rhythms with funk and jazz, became the sound of the 1970s and 1980s in West Africa.

At the turn of the millennium, this rich cultural heritage fed into Afrobeats, along with a mix of Western pop, rap and dancehall.

It gained further popularity in the UK and North America, where there are large diaspora populations, in particular from Nigeria, where most of the genre’s stars came from.

Afrobeats artists began performing to these communities at first in small venues in the early 2010s.

Then it really take off – between 2017 and 2022 Afrobeats experienced 550% growth in streams on Spotify, according to data from the world’s most popular streaming service.

This resulted in many of the artists becoming household names around the world, and the musical industry taking note.

It has gone on to include African music in mainstream award ceremonies like the Grammys.

Today these artists easily pack out stadiums like Madison Square Garden in New York – pictured below ahead of Wizkid’s performance in 2023.

“Madison Square was a night to remember – the iconic venue illuminated in the colours of the Nigerian flag honouring our homeland,” says Drummer.

Drummer was able to take photographs of the musicians as they started out on their global careers.

“I always felt that I was capturing moments with just my eyes. Walking the streets of New York City, I would frame scenes in my mind – people, light, emotion,” the photographer says.

“I’d ask myself, how do I translate this mental perspective to reality?”

Gradually, the audience grew and became more international with fans in countries such as China, Germany and Brazil.

Now even non-African musicians are taking up the Afrobeats sound and releasing their own versions, including artists such as Chris Brown, who released Blow My Mind with Davido.

The US singer has also performed with Wizkid in London – as the photo below from 2021 shows.

“I love this picture because when Wizkid brought Chris Brown out at The O2 arena, the place exploded. No-one saw it coming – the energy shifted instantly,” says Drummer.

“Shock, excitement and pure electricity. A moment stamped in memory and in history.”

Drummer says one of the aims of the photo book is not to just show people what he saw, but to help them feel what he experienced – through his pictures.

It also sometimes reveals the feelings of the superstars in their private moments.

This final picture shows Wizkid backstage on his phone in 2021.

It was “a rare quiet moment”, but even in the silence and the calm his presence spoke volumes, says Drummer.

• The sounds that has penetrated the world
• Afrobeats megastar Burna Boy is still ‘a work in progress’, his mother says
• Rema, the Afrobeats star who does not intend to calm down
• How Afrobeats made it to the very top of Glastonbury
• Afrobeats is finally getting its own chart

Iconic Indian director and actor Guru Dutt was just 39 years old when he died in 1964 but he left behind a cinematic legacy that continues to resonate decades later.

Born on 9 July 1925 in the southern state of Karnataka, next week marks his birth centenary. But the man behind the camera, his emotional turmoil and mental health struggles remain largely unexplored.

The maker of classic Hindi films such as Pyaasa and Kaagaz Ke Phool – film school staples for their timeless themes – Dutt forged a deeply personal, introspective style of filmmaking that was novel in the post-independence era.

His complex characters often reflected his personal struggles; his plots touched upon universal motifs, inviting the audience to confront uncomfortable realities through hauntingly beautiful cinema.

Dutt’s beginnings were humble and his childhood was marked by financial hardship and a turbulent family life. After his family shifted to Bengal in eastern India for work, a young Dutt became deeply inspired by the region’s culture and it would shape his cinematic vision later in life.

He dropped his surname – Padukone – after entering the Bombay film industry in the 1940s. He made his debut not as a director but as a choreographer, and also worked as a telephone operator to make ends meet. The turbulence and uncertainty of the decade – India’s independence struggle had intensified – impacted the aspiring filmmaker’s prospects.

It was during this phase that he penned Kashmakash, a story rooted in artistic frustration and social disillusionment, ideas that would later shape his cinematic masterpiece Pyaasa.

Dutt’s friendship with fellow struggler Dev Anand – who soon rose to fame as an actor – helped him get the chance to direct his first film in 1951. The noir thriller, Baazi, propelled him into the spotlight.

He soon found love with celebrated singer Geeta Roy, and by many accounts, these early years were his happiest.

After Dutt launched his own film company, he scored back-to-back hits with romantic comedies Aar-Paar and Mr & Mrs 55, both featuring him in lead roles. But yearning for artistic depth, he set out to make what would become his defining film – Pyaasa.

The hard-hitting, haunting film explored an artist’s struggle in a materialistic world and decades later, it would go on to be the only Hindi film in Time magazine’s list of the 20th Century’s 100 greatest movies.

Dutt’s late younger sister, Lalitha Lajmi, who collaborated with me when I wrote his biography, said that Pyaasa was her brother’s “dream project” and that “he wanted it to be perfect”.

As a director, Dutt was fond of ‘creating’ the film as it took shape on the sets, making a lot of changes in the script and dialogues and experimenting with camera techniques. While he was known for scrapping and reshooting scenes, this reached worrying levels during Pyaasa – for instance, he shot 104 takes of the now famous climax sequence.

He would shout and get bad-tempered when things did not go right, Lajmi said.

“Sleep evaded him. The misuse of and dependence on alcohol had begun. At his worst, he started experimenting with sleeping pills, mixing them in his whiskey. Guru Dutt gave his all to make Pyaasa – his sleep, his dreams, and his memories,” she said.

In 1956, as his dream project neared completion, 31-year-old Dutt attempted suicide.

“When the news came, we rushed to Pali Hill [where he lived],” Lajmi said. “I knew he was in turmoil. He often called me, saying we need to talk but wouldn’t say a word when I got there,” she added.

But following his discharge from hospital, no professional support was sought by the family.

Mental health was a “socially stigmatised” topic at the time, and with big money riding on Pyaasa, Lajmi said that the family tried to move on, without fully confronting the reasons behind her brother’s internal struggles.

Released in 1957, Pyaasa was a critical and commercial triumph that catapulted Dutt to stardom. But the filmmaker often expressed a sense of emptiness despite his success.

Pyaasa’s chief cinematographer VK Murthy recalled Dutt saying, “I wanted to be a director, an actor, make good films – I have achieved it all. I have money, I have everything, yet I have nothing.”

There was also a strange paradox between Dutt’s films and his personal life.

His films often portrayed strong, independent women but off screen, as Lajmi recalled, he expected his wife to embrace more traditional roles and wanted her to sing only in films produced by his company.

To keep his company thriving, Dutt had a simple rule: each artistic gamble should be followed by a bankable commercial film.

But buoyed by the success of Pyaasa, he ignored his own rule and dived straight into making his most personal, expensive and semi-autobiographical film: Kaagaz Ke Phool.

It tells the story of a filmmaker’s unhappy marriage and confused relationship with his muse. It eerily ends with the death of the filmmaker after he fails to come to terms with his acute loneliness and doomed relationships.

Though now hailed as a classic, it was a commercial failure at the time, a blow Dutt reportedly never overcame.

In the Channel 4 documentary In Search of Guru Dutt, his co-star Waheeda Rehman remembered him saying, “. (There are only two things in life: success and failure) There is nothing in between.”

After Kagaz Ke Phool, he never directed a film again.

But his company recovered over time, and he made a strong comeback as a producer with Chaudhvin Ka Chand, the most commercially successful film of his career.

He then launched Sahib Bibi Aur Ghulam directed by his trusted screenwriter Abrar Alvi. By this time, Lajmi said, his personal life was in severe turmoil, marked by mood swings.

The film delved into the loneliness of a woman trapped in a loveless marriage to a philandering, often tyrannical landlord in an opulent yet feudal world.

Writer Bimal Mitra recalls that Dutt told him about his struggle with sleeplessness and reliance on sleeping pills during this time. By then, his marriage had collapsed and mental health had worsened. Mitra recalled many conversations with Guru Dutt’s constant refrain: “I think I will go crazy.”

One night, Dutt attempted to take his own life again. He was unconscious for three days.

Lajmi says that after this, on the doctor’s advice, his family called a psychiatrist to inquire about treatment for Dutt but they never followed up. “We never called the psychiatrist again,” she added with regret.

For years, she believed her brother was silently crying for help, perhaps feeling trapped in a dark space where no one could see his pain, so dark that even he could not find a way out of it.

A few days after Dutt was discharged, the shooting for Sahib Bibi Aur Ghulam resumed as if nothing had happened.

When Mitra asked him about the incident, Dutt said, “Nowadays, I often wonder what unrest was this, what was the restlessness that I was hell-bent on committing suicide? When I think about this, I get terrorised with fear. But that day, I felt no dilemma in swallowing those sleeping pills.”

The film was a success, became India’s official entry to the 1963 Berlin Film Festival and also won a national award.

But Dutt’s personal struggles continued to mount. He separated from his wife and even though he continued acting in films, he battled profound loneliness, often turning to alcohol and sleeping pills for respite.

On 10 October 1964, Dutt, 39, was found dead in his room.

“I know that he had always wished for it [death], longed for it… and he got it,’ his co-star Waheeda Rehman wrote in the Journal of Film Industry, 1967.

Like the protagonist of Pyaasa, true acclaim came to Dutt only after he was gone.

Cinema enthusiasts often wonder what might have been had he lived longer; perhaps he would have continued to reshape India’s cinematic landscape with his visionary, poetic works.

When the BBC revealed that MI5 had lied to three courts, the Security Service apologised for giving false evidence – vowing to investigate and explain how such a serious failure had occurred.

But on Wednesday, the High Court ruled that these inquiries were “deficient”, ordering a new “robust” investigation. A panel of judges said they would consider the issue of contempt of court proceedings against individuals once that was complete.

Now we can detail how, over the past few months leading up to the judgment, MI5 continued to provide misleading evidence and tried to keep damning material secret.

The material gives an unprecedented insight into the internal chaos at MI5 as it responded to what has become a major crisis and test of its credibility.

At the heart of the case is the violent abuse of a woman by a state agent under MI5’s control. After the BBC began investigating, MI5 attempted to cover its tracks – scattering a trail of false and misleading evidence.

The case started very simply: I was investigating a neo-Nazi, who I came to understand was also an abusive misogynist and MI5 agent.

After I contacted this man – known publicly as X – in 2020 to challenge him on his extremism, a senior MI5 officer called me up and tried to stop me running a story.

The officer said X had been working for MI5 and informing on extremists, and so it was wrong for me to say he was an extremist himself.

It was this disclosure, repeated in a series of phone calls, which the Security Service would later lie about to three courts as it attempted to keep X’s role and identity shrouded in secrecy.

During the phone calls with me, MI5 denied information I had about X’s violence, but I decided to spend more time investigating. What I learned was that X was a violent misogynist abuser with paedophilic tendencies who had used his MI5 role as a tool of coercion.

He had attacked his girlfriend – known publicly as “Beth” – with a machete, and abused an earlier partner, whose child he had threatened to kill. He even had cannibal fantasies about eating children.

When I challenged both X and MI5 with our evidence, the government took me and the BBC to court in early 2022. They failed to stop the story but did win legal anonymity for X.

Arguing for secrecy in a succession of court proceedings, the Security Service told judges it had stuck to its core policy of neither confirming nor denying (NCND) informants’ identities, including during conversations with me. Crucially, this stance allowed it to keep evidence secret from “Beth”, who had taken MI5 to court.

The service aggressively maintained its position until I produced evidence proving it was untrue – including a recording of one of the calls with a senior MI5 officer.

Finally accepting it had provided false evidence, MI5’s director general Sir Ken McCallum said: “We take our duty to provide truthful, accurate and complete information very seriously, and have offered an unreserved apology to the court.”

Two investigations were commissioned: an internal MI5 disciplinary inquiry, and an external review by Sir Jonathan Jones KC, who was once the government’s chief lawyer. This latter review was personally commissioned by the Home Secretary Yvette Cooper and MI5’s director general.

Both of these concluded that the original false evidence was not due to dishonesty by MI5 or any of its officers. They effectively put it down to mistakes, both personal and systemic.

But these two inquiries quickly began to fall apart.

The government initially refused to provide both reports in full to the court.

Like many cases involving MI5, this one was held partly in secret to allow the government to use evidence which it says is too sensitive to be discussed in open hearings.

Access to the secret, closed part of the case was only available to the government, the judge and security-cleared barristers known as special advocates who were representing the BBC – but who were not allowed to communicate directly with us.

The government said it would not be providing any closed evidence about the two inquiries to the judge or the special advocates.

Instead, it provided an “open” version of Sir Jonathan’s external review, with apparently sensitive material edited out, and it purported to provide a full account of the internal inquiry in a witness statement by MI5’s director general of strategy – known as Witness B.

Sir Jonathan wrote that he was “satisfied” that the open version was a “fair and accurate” account of his full review. Witness B, third-in-command at the Security Service, said in his statement: “I am satisfied that there is nothing in the closed material that has been excluded from the open report which prevents MI5 from providing the court with a frank and accurate account.”

During hearings, the government argued against disclosing secret material to the court. It eventually agreed to hand over the secret version of Sir Jonathan’s review, and then was ordered to disclose the internal investigation report described by Witness B, along with policy documents and notes of interviews with MI5 officers.

When the disclosure came, it was clear why MI5 was so keen to keep it secret: the summaries, including the one from MI5’s third-in-command, were not fair or accurate. Key information had been withheld, which undermined their conclusions.

In short, the court was still being misled.

At the same time, in response to the inquiries, I was submitting new evidence which proved that some of the claims made by the two reviews were false.

Neither the internal investigation nor Sir Jonathan Jones contacted me, despite the fact I was the only other person who really knew what had been said in all the phone calls at the centre of the case.

The two official reviews concluded that the senior officer who called me – Officer 2 – failed to recall telling me that X was an agent.

“There is nothing surprising in this narrative, which is ultimately about the fallibility of memory in the absence of a written record,” as the Security Service put it in legal submissions.

The Jones review said that, because no formal record was made of the calls, by the time MI5 was preparing evidence the “only first-hand evidence available was Officer 2’s personal recollection”.

Sir Jonathan said the officer’s recollection was “uncertain”, although it had hardened over time into a position that he had not departed from NCND.

But material that MI5 and the government sought to keep secret shows that Officer 2 gave a detailed recollection of the conversation with me – until I exposed it as false.

His recollection was contained in a note of an internal MI5 meeting, arranged to discuss what to tell the special advocates and the court about the conversations with me. In it, the officer insisted he did not depart from NCND and gave a melodramatic account of my “long pauses” as I said I needed the story, before I eventually became cooperative and said I had “seen the light”.

This was all untrue. He also falsely claimed I had revealed that I had spoken to X’s former girlfriend, when I had done no such thing.

The note also showed that Officer 2 had told colleagues that he persuaded me to drop the story by implying that agent X was being investigated by MI5 as an extremist. This was the exact opposite of what he had in fact told me, which was that X was an MI5 agent rather than a real extremist.

Sir Jonathan was aware of the full version of this elaborate false account, but it was absent from the unclassified version given to the court and the BBC.

The MI5 internal review also claimed that Officer 2 had a lapse of memory.

It said that Officer 2 had told another officer – a key figure involved in preparing the Security Service’s false evidence for the court, known as Officer 3 – that he could not remember whether he had departed from NCND.

In his statement to court, Witness B – MI5’s director general of strategy – said Officer 2 had said “they could not recall the details” of the conversations with me but “did not think they had departed from NCND” and believed “they would have remembered if they had done so”.

But an internal note by Officer 3, written after his discussion with Officer 2, contained a very different account.

It stated unequivocally that “we did not breach NCND” and that the contact with me “was prefaced with confirmation that this conversation was not on the record”.

It also stated that, “after being initially fairly bullish, De Simone said that he acknowledged the strength of the argument, and agreed to remove those references”.

All three claims were false, including about the conversations being off the record, something now accepted by MI5.

The evidence showed specific false claims being presented as memories – not the absence of memory the two inquiries said they found.

The question of memory was so important because the court was told that written records were not available.

Witness B – MI5’s third-in-command – said the internal investigation established that Officer 2 had “updated colleagues within MI5” about the conversations with me, but that “there was no evidence identified of any written record being made, by Officer 2 or anyone else”.

“The fact of the matter was that Officer 2 was reliant on personal recollection alone which inevitably carries a degree of inherent uncertainty,” Witness B said in his statement to court.

Sir Jonathan gave the same impression in his review.

But the secret material MI5 was forced to hand over proved this was false. There were several written records consistent with what had really happened – that MI5 had chosen to depart from NCND and that several people were aware of it.

There was a decision log.

There were notes of conversations with Agent X himself.

There were emails.

The decision log showed that, just after the authorisation took place, a formal record was created saying the plan was to call the BBC and “reveal the MI5 link to X”. The log then noted: “This was discussed with Officer 2 who subsequently approached the BBC to begin this conversation.”

In an internal email, after I had said I would not include X in an initial story, one of X’s handling team reported this development to other MI5 officers and accurately described the approach to me, namely that Officer 2 had claimed my proposed story was “incorrect” and the rationale for this was that most of the material was as a “direct result of his tasking” as an MI5 agent.

Notes of calls and meeting with Agent X show he approved the plan to reveal his MI5 role and was kept updated about the calls. In a later meeting with him, MI5 recorded that he was “happy” to meet with me, which was an offer MI5 had made and I ignored.

But it showed that MI5 and X were well aware of the NCND departure, because the Security Service would obviously only try to arrange a meeting with someone like X if they an agent.

In a telling note, MI5 said X thought that a meeting with me would “hopefully serve to counter some of the conclusions that the journalist had reached about X”. This is a violent, misogynistic neo-Nazi, a danger to women and children, yet MI5 wanted to do PR for him with a journalist.

These records and others show that the handling team for agent X understood there had been an NCND departure. This was unsurprising as the calls with me at the time made it clear that his case officers knew what was happening.

But the internal investigation report records how, as MI5 was preparing to take the BBC to court to block our story on X, one officer went around convincing colleagues that no such departure had ever taken place.

Officer 3 spoke several times to a member of the agent-handling team within MI5 – known as Officer 4 – regarding what had been said to me about X.

“We have already named him pal,” said Officer 4, according to Officer 4’s evidence to the investigation and Officer 3 replied: “I can categorically tell you we didn’t”.

After these conversations, Officer 4 said he felt the other officer had put him “back in his box”. Other members of the handling team thought what Officer 3 was saying was “odd” and “weird”.

MI5 has given completely contradictory explanations for how the false claim about not departing from NCND had got into its witness statement.

The claim was given to court by an officer known as Witness A, acting as a corporate witness – meaning he was representing the organisation rather than appearing as someone necessarily involved personally in the events.

When the government was trying to stop the BBC publishing its story about X in 2022, the BBC’s special advocates asked how Witness A could be so sure that NCND had not been breached.

The government’s lawyers said “Witness A spoke to the MI5 officer who had contact with the BBC” – meaning Officer 2 – and the officer had said he neither confirmed nor denied agent X’s role. The lawyers’ answers strongly appeared to suggest that the pair had even spoken at the time of the calls with me.

After we exposed Witness A’s false evidence, the lawyers’ answers created a problem for MI5 as it either suggested Officer 2 had lied all along – or that he and Witness A were both lying.

It has since been claimed that the men did not speak to each other at the time of the calls with me.

Despite not reconciling these contradictory accounts, the investigation concluded “the parties were collectively doing their best to prepare a witness statement that was accurate”.

Officer 2 claimed that he had never departed from NCND before and said that was a key reason why he would have recalled doing so.

But new evidence I submitted to court showed he had also told me whether or not five other people I was investigating were working with the Security Service. One of them was an undercover MI5 officer – one of the most sensitive and memorable details an officer could disclose.

Officer 2 had invited me to meet this undercover officer, just as he had offered me the chance to meet Agent X. I had not pursued either offer, which I thought were a crude attempt at pulling me into MI5’s orbit.

Indeed, the internal MI5 material suggests that its officers wrongly believe that the role of journalists is to be cheerleaders for the Security Service. I was variously described as “bullish”, “stubborn”, “awkward”, and not “as on board as other journalists”.

They said, before their involvement with me, the BBC was seen as “friendly” and “supportive” of MI5. In reality, journalists like me are here to scrutinise and challenge the organisation.

The five other NCND departures were not apparently uncovered by MI5’s internal investigators, nor by Sir Jonathan Jones.

Disclosing agent X’s role would have been memorable and unusual on its own.

But the fact there were also departures on NCND relating to five other people made the chain of events even more extraordinary, and made any claimed loss of memory by Officer 2 – and in MI5 more widely – simply unbelievable.

Both inquiries failed to speak to key people who were on the calls they were supposed to be investigating. Neither of them spoke to me – but there were other omissions too.

Sir Jonathan’s review wrongly claimed that “only Officer 2 had been party to the calls” with me. In fact, Officer 2 had invited another senior officer to join one of the calls. He introduced himself by saying: “I head up all counter-terrorism investigations here.”

He referred to my earlier “conversations” with Officer 2 and was plainly aware of their content – he even made a specific pun about something connected to X.

While MI5’s internal investigation was aware that the head of counter-terror investigations had joined one of the calls and mentioned it in their secret report, investigators never bothered interviewing him.

After I submitted new evidence, MI5 was forced to speak to him – but the internal investigators concluded there was nothing to show he knew about NCND departures.

Sir Jonathan had also failed to speak to the MI5 officer at the centre of the case, Officer 2. He had simply adopted the conclusions of the internal inquiry – in which MI5 was investigating itself.

It emerged during the court case that Sir Jonathan did speak to MI5 director general Sir Ken McCallum for his investigation. But when the BBC’s special advocates requested any notes of the interview, they were told that none existed.

“MI5’s job is to keep the country safe,” Sir Ken said after the High Court judgement. “Maintaining the trust of the courts is essential to that mission.”

Because of this case, the courts have made plain that MI5’s practices should change. The government says it is reviewing how the service prepares and gives evidence.

Because NCND has been abandoned in relation to Agent X, Beth will now have a fairer trial of her legal claim against MI5. The monolithically consistent way in which the policy has been presented, including in a string of important cases, has been shown to be untrue.

This has become a story about whether MI5 can be believed, and about how it uses its privileged position to conceal and lie.

But in the beginning – and in the end – it is a story about violence against women and girls, about the importance placed on that crucial issue by the state, and about how covering up for abusive misogynists never ends well.

The River Seine in Paris has reopened publicly to swimmers for the first time since 1923 after a century-long ban.

The seasonal opening of the Seine for swimming is viewed as a key legacy of the Paris 2024 Olympics, when open water swimmers and triathletes competed in its waters which were specially cleaned for the event.

On Saturday morning at 08:00 local time (07:00 BST) a few dozen swimmers arrived ahead of the opening and dived into the water when they were able to do so.

There are three designated areas for public swimming in the Seine – one near the Eiffel Tower, another close to Notre Dame Cathedral and a third in eastern Paris.

Zones have changing rooms, showers, and beach-style furniture, which allow for up to 300 people to lay out their towels.

Until the end of August, the three swimming sites will be open for free at scheduled times to anyone with a minimum age of 10 or 14 years, depending on the location.

Lifeguards will also be present keeping an eye on those in the river.

The promise to lift the swimming ban dates back to 1988, when then-mayor of Paris and future president Jacques Chirac first advocated for its reversal.

Improvements over the last 20 years have already led to a sharp reduction in faecal bacteria entering the river.

• Paris to bring back swimming in Seine after 100 years
• Would you swim in the Seine?

For 100 years swimming was banned in the river because of the levels of water pollution that could make people ill.

Ahead of last summer’s Olympics more than €1.4bn (£1.2bn; $1.6bn) was invested into cleaning up the Seine.

But, in the lead up to the games there were doubts as to whether the River Seine would be ready for the Olympics after it was revealed it failed water quality tests.

Organisers blamed rainfall for the increased pollution which limited athletes’ abilities to train for the triathlon, marathon swimming and paratriathlon.

Last July, Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo and other members of the Olympic committee went into the Seine to prove that it was safe to swim in.

Twenty-nine people have been arrested in London after police said they were responding to a protest in support of the banned group Palestine Action.

The Metropolitan Police said those arrested were being held on suspicion of offences under the Terrorism Act 2000 and had been taken into custody.

Pictures from the Westminster demonstration showed a small group holding placards reading “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action”.

As of Saturday, the group is proscribed under the Terrorism Act 2000, after lawyers acting on its behalf failed with a court bid to block the ban on Friday.

The designation means being a member of, or showing support for Palestine Action, is a criminal offence and could lead to up to 14 years in prison.

In an earlier statement, the Met said: “Officers are responding to a protest in support of Palestine Action in Parliament Square.

“The group is now proscribed and expressing support for them is a criminal offence.”

Protesters holding home-made, cardboard placards gathered near the Mahatma Gandhi statue in Parliament Square on Saturday.

Pictures emerged showing police surrounding the group and detaining people, with one woman seen being taken away in handcuffs by officers.

The protest group Defend Our Juries wrote to Met Police commissioner Mark Rowley on Friday to inform the force a demonstration where placards expressing support of Palestine Action would be displayed was to go ahead on Saturday.

In a statement released after the arrests, the group said: “It’s a relief to know that Counter Terrorism police have nothing better to do.”

The government moved to ban Palestine Action after an estimated £7m of damage was caused to planes at RAF Brize Norton last month during a protest the group said it was behind.

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced plans to proscribe the group last month, calling damage to two military aircraft “disgraceful” and claiming the group had a “long history of unacceptable criminal damage”.

Palestine Action has engaged in activities that have predominantly targeted arms companies since the start of the current war in Gaza.

The group’s ban came into effect on Saturday after High Court judge Mr Justice Chamberlain refused its request to temporarily block the move, saying the claim was “insufficient to outweigh the strong public interest in maintaining the order in force”.

Raza Husain KC, barrister for Palestine Action’s co-founder Huda Ammori, who brought the complaint, told the court banning the group would be “ill-considered” and an “authoritarian abuse” of power.

Israel launched its military campaign in Gaza in response to Hamas’s 7 October 2023 attack, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 others were taken hostage. The death toll in Gaza has since risen to more than 57,000, according to the Hamas-run health ministry.

Israel has strongly denied allegations of genocide, claims which are also being examined by the International Court of Justice.

As Donald Trump cheered the passage of his self-styled, and officially named, Big Beautiful Budget Bill through Congress this week, long-sown seeds of doubt about the scale and sustainability of US borrowing from the rest of the world sprouted anew.

Trump’s tax-cutting budget bill is expected to add at least $3 trillion (£2.2 trillion) to the US’s already eye-watering $37tn (£27tn) debt pile. There is no shortage of critics of the plan, not least Trump’s former ally Elon Musk, who has called it a “disgusting abomination”.

The growing debt pile leaves some to wonder whether there is a limit to how much the rest of the world will lend Uncle Sam.

Those doubts have been showing up recently in the weaker value of the dollar and the higher interest rate investors are demanding to lend money to America.

It needs to borrow this money to make up the difference between what it earns and what it spends every year.

Since the beginning of this year, the dollar has fallen 10% against the pound and 15% against the euro.

Although US borrowing costs have been steady overall, the difference between the interest rates paid on longer-term loans versus shorter-term loans – what’s known as the yield curve – has increased, or steepened, signalling increased doubts about the long-term sustainability of US borrowing.

And that is despite the fact that the US has lowered interest rates more slowly than the EU and the UK, which would normally make the dollar stronger because investors can get higher interest rates on bank deposits.

The founder of the world’s biggest hedge fund, Ray Dalio, believes that US borrowing is at a crossroads.

On its current trajectory he estimates the US will soon be spending $10tn a year in loan and interest repayments.

“I am confident that the [US] government’s financial condition is at an inflection point because, if this is not dealt with now, the debts will build up to levels where they can’t be managed without great trauma,” he says.

So what might that trauma look like?

The first option is a drastic reduction in government spending, a big increase in taxes or both.

Ray Dalio suggests that cutting the budget deficit from its current 6% to 3% soon could head off trouble in the future.

Trump’s new budget bill did cut some spending, but it also cut taxes more, and so the current political trajectory is going the other way.

Secondly, as in previous crises, the US central bank could print more money and use it to buy up government debt – as we saw after the great financial crisis of 2008.

But that can end up fuelling inflation and inequality as the owners of assets like houses and shares do much better than those who rely on the value of labour.

The third is a straightforward US default. Can’t pay won’t pay. Given that the “full faith and credit of the US Treasury” underpins the entire global financial system, that would make the great financial crisis look like a picnic.

So how likely is any of this?

Right now, mercifully, not very.

But the reasons why are not actually that comforting. The fact is, whether we like it or not, the world has few alternatives to the dollar.

Economist and former bond supremo Mohamed El-Erian told the BBC that many are trying to reduce dollar holdings, “the dollar is overweight and the world knows it, which is why we have seen a rise in gold, the euro and the pound, but it’s hard to move at scale so there’s really very few places to go”.

“The dollar is like your cleanest dirty shirt, you have to keep wearing it.”

Nevertheless, the future of the dollar and the world’s benchmark asset – US government bonds – is being discussed at the highest levels.

The governor of the Bank of England recently told the BBC that the levels of US debt and the status of the dollar is “very much on [US Treasury] Secretary Bessent’s mind. I don’t think the dollar is fundamentally under threat at the moment but he is very aware of these issues and I don’t think it is something that he underestimates.”

Debt of $37tn is an unfathomable number. If you saved a million dollars every day, it would take you 100,000 years to save up that much.

The sensible way to look at debt is as a percentage of a country’s income. The US economy produces income of around $25tn a year.

While its debt to income level is much higher than many, it’s not as high as Japan or Italy, and it has the benefit of the world’s most innovative and wealth creating economy behind it.

At home I have a book called Death of the Dollar by William F Rickenbacker in which he warns of the risks to the dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency. It was written in 1968. Mr Rickenbacker is no longer with us – the dollar is.

But it doesn’t mean that its status and value is a divine right.

Former Arsenal footballer Thomas Partey has been charged with five counts of rape and one count of sexual assault.

The offences are reported to have taken place between 2021-2022, the Metropolitan Police said.

The charges involve three women, with two counts of rape relating to one woman, three counts of rape in connection to a second woman and one count of sexual assault linked to a third woman.

The Ghanaian international denies the charges and “welcomes the opportunity to finally clear his name”, his lawyer said.

The charges follow an investigation by detectives, which started in February 2022 after police first received a report of rape.

The 32-year-old’s contract with Arsenal ended on Monday after playing with the team since 2020.

An Arsenal spokesman said: “The player’s contract ended on June 30. Due to ongoing legal proceedings the club is unable to comment on the case.”

The Football Association and the Premier League declined to comment.

Det Supt Andy Furphy, who is leading the investigation, said: “Our priority remains providing support to the women who have come forward.

“We would ask anyone who has been impacted by this case, or anyone who has information, to speak with our team. You can contact detectives about this investigation by emailing CIT@met.police.uk”

Mr Partey, of Hertfordshire, is expected to appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Tuesday 5 August.

In a statement, his lawyer Jenny Wiltshire said: “Thomas Partey denies all the charges against him.

“He has fully cooperated with the police and CPS throughout their three-year investigation.

“He now welcomes the opportunity to finally clear his name.

“Given that there are now ongoing legal proceedings, my client is unable to comment further.”

Mr Partey joined Arsenal for £45.3m from Atletico Madrid in October 2020, made 35 top-flight appearances last season and scored four goals as the London club finished second in the Premier League.

He also played 12 times in the Champions League as the Gunners reached the semi-finals before being knocked out by eventual winners Paris St-Germain.

Overall, he made 130 Premier League appearances for Mikel Arteta’s side, scoring nine goals.

Mr Partey has also made more than 50 appearances for Ghana’s national team, and most recently played at World Cup qualification matches in March.

Australian actor Julian McMahon, famed for roles in popular series like Nip/Tuck and Charmed, has died aged 56.

His wife said the actor passed away in Clearwater, Florida, on Wednesday. He had been diagnosed with cancer.

“Julian loved life. He loved his family. He loved his friends. He loved his work, and he loved his fans. His deepest wish was to bring joy into as many lives as possible,” Kelly Paniagua said in a statement carried by Deadline.

McMahon’s career took off with the hit supernatural television series Charmed before he gained wider recognition with Nip/Tuck, the medical drama in which he played the role of plastic surgeon Dr Christian Troy.

Running for six seasons from 2003 to 2010, the show earned him a Golden Globe nomination.

Co-star Dylan Walsh told Deadline he was “stunned”.

“We rode this wave together and I loved him.

“Jules! I know you’d want me to say something to make you smile — all the inside jokes. All those years you had my back, and my god, we laughed. My heart is with you. Rest in peace.”

McMahon also played Doctor Doom in two Fantastic Four films in 2005 and 2007 and later appeared in three seasons of FBI: Most Wanted.

Dick Wolf, the producer of FBI: Most Wanted, said McMahon’s death was “shocking news”.

McMahon was the son of a former Australian prime minister and went on to play an Australian prime minister’s role in Netflix’s The Residence – one of his recent appearances.

McMahon married three times – the first to Australian singer-actress Dannii Minogue, sister of Kylie Minogue.

Australia’s prime minister has promised to take strong action following an apparent arson attack on a synagogue in Melbourne.

Pictures showed a man pouring liquid on the synagogue’s front door before setting it on fire on Friday night. Some 20 people having dinner inside at the time were evacuated without any injuries. A man has been charged and is due to appear in court.

Police are also trying to determine if the incident is linked to an attack against a Jewish-owned restaurant in the city on the same night.

A string of antisemitic attacks have occurred in Australia in the past few months, sparked by tensions over the Israel-Hamas war.

The Australian government has appointed a special envoy to combat antisemitism, and passed tougher laws against hate crimes following a wave of high-profile attacks.

“Antisemitism has no place in Australia,” Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said following the attack on the East Melbourne synagogue.

“Those responsible for these shocking acts must face the full force of the law and my government will provide all necessary support toward this effort,” Albanese said.

Angelo Loras, 34, from Toongabbie on the outskirts of Sydney, was arrested in Melbourne on Saturday and has been charged with arson and reckless conduct endangering life.

It is not clear if the incident was linked to the attack on the Miznon restaurant in the city’s business district during which rioters broke in, throwing chairs and other objects while chanting “death to the IDF [Israel Defense Forces]”. Some of the attackers were led away in handcuffs.

“These events are a severe escalation directed towards our community,” said Alex Ryvchin, co-chief executive of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry.

“There have been too many antisemitic attacks in Australia,” Israel’s Foreign Minister Gideon Saar said.

“The Australian government must do more to fight this toxic disease.”

The ongoing conflict in the Middle East has become a volatile political issue in Australia.

It has resulted in protests from both Jewish and Muslim communities, as well as a sharp uptick in Islamophobia and antisemitism.

The Israeli military launched a campaign in Gaza in response to the 7 October 2023 attack, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 others were taken hostage.

At least 57,268 people have been killed in Gaza since then, according to the territory’s health ministry.

Oasis blew off the cobwebs and swept away the doubters as they kicked off their reunion tour in Cardiff.

Taking to the stage after a 16-year break, the band sounded refreshed and rejuvenated, tearing into classics like Cigarettes and Alcohol, Live Forever and Slide Away – as 70,000 fans clasped each other and spilled beer all over themselves.

They opened with Hello, with its chorus of “it’s good to be back”, following up with Acquiesce – one of the few songs that features vocals from both Noel and Liam Gallagher.

The lyric “we need each other” felt like a reconciliation – or a sigh of relief – as the brothers buried the hatchet of a decades-long feud and reconnected with their fans.

Liam, in particular, attacked the gig with wild-eyed passion – stalking the stage and biting into the lyrics like a lion tearing apart its prey.

The audience responded in kind. A communal fervour greeted songs like Wonderwall and Don’t Look Back In Anger, both pulled from Oasis’s 1995 masterpiece, (What’s the Story) Morning Glory? – one of the best selling British albums of all time.

All night, it was one singalong after another: Some Might Say, Supersonic, Whatever, Half The World Away, Rock ‘n’ Roll Star.

• BBC Sounds: The Rise and Fall of Oasis podcast
• Oasis comeback tour setlist: Which songs made the cut?

During Live Forever – which they dedicated to Liverpool footballer Diogo Jota – the audience even sang Noel’s guitar solo.

“You sound like a load of Charlotte Churches,” said Liam, impressed, after Stand By Me.

The frontman sounded fresh and powerful himself, putting to rest the vocal issues that had plagued him on previous tours – a result of Hashimoto’s disease, an auto-immune condition that can affect the voice.

As fans will know, Oasis were never the most dynamic act on stage. Noel, in particular, wears the studious look of a man trying to remember his National Insurance number – but somehow, it’s impossible to take your eyes off them.

Although they came out hand in hand, there were few other signs of chemistry between the brothers, who never addressed one another during the two-and-a-quarter hour show.

But just hearing them harmonise again, after all the animosity and the turbulent waters under the bridge, was hugely emotional.

“Nice one for putting up with us over the years,” said Liam, introducing the night’s last song, Champagne Supernova. “We are hard work, I get it.”

As they left the stage, the Gallaghers shared a brief hug.

But the band’s volatility was always part of the appeal.

Their off-stage antics made the headlines as often as their music: They missed their first European gig after getting arrested on a cross-channel ferry, Liam lost two front teeth in a fight with German police, and later abandoned a pivotal US tour to go house-hunting.

Half the fun was working out which act of the Shakespearean drama was being enacted in front of you.

Still, Liam’s antics often frustrated his brother.

“Noel is the guy who’s chained to the Tasmanian devil,” Danny Eccleston, consultant editor of the Mojo magazine, once said. “A lifetime of that would wear you down.”

It all came to a head at a gig in Paris in 2009. Oasis split up after a backstage altercation that began with Liam throwing a plum at his older brother’s head.

In the intervening years, they engaged in a long war of words in the press, on stage and social media.

Liam repeatedly called Noel a “massive potato” on Twitter and, more seriously, accused him of skipping the One Love concert for victims of the Manchester Arena bombing.

• As it happened: revisit our live page from the night
• Watch: Fans’ reaction to the Gallagher’s return
• The stories behind three Oasis classics
• Noel gave me his Wonderwall guitar – after an angry Liam smashed mine

Noel responded by saying Liam was a “village idiot” who “needs to see a psychiatrist”.

But relations thawed last year, with Liam dedicating Half The World Away to his brother at Reading Festival last August.

Two days later, the reunion was announced, with the band declaring: “The guns have fallen silent. The stars have aligned. The great wait is over. Come see. It will not be televised.”

A scramble for tickets ensued, with more than 10 million people applying to see the 19 UK dates alone.

Those who succeeded were shocked by the high prices – especially when standing tickets advertised at £155 were re-labelled “in demand” and changed on Ticketmaster to £355 plus fees.

On stage, Liam made light of the scandal, asking the audience: “Is it worth the £4,000 you paid for a ticket?”

For many, the answer was yes. Cardiff was awash with Oasis fans from all over the world – including Peru, Japan, Argentina, Spain and South Korea.

An Italian couple had “live forever” inscribed on their wedding rings. A British woman, expecting her first child, had scrawled “our kid” – Noel’s nickname for Liam – across her baby bump.

The city was awash in bucket hats and branded tracksuit tops. Outside the stadium, an enterprising busker drew a massive crowd by playing a set of Oasis songs. Everyone joined in.

Inside, the band stuck to the classics, with a setlist that only strayed out of the 1990s once, for 2002’s Little By Little.

The songs held up remarkably well.

The youthful hunger of tracks like Live Forever and Supersonic crackled with energy. And Cigarettes and Alcohol, written by Noel in 1991, about the discontent of Manchester’s working classes after 15 years of Conservative rule, sounded as relevant in 2025 as it did then.

“?” snarled Liam. Fans, young and old, roared along in recognition and approval.

Later, during Wonderwall, the frontman cheekily changed the lyrics to say: “.”

I have seen Oasis many, many times and this was the best they’ve been since 1995, when I caught them supporting REM at Ireland’s Slane Castle, as they limbered up for the release of (What’s the Story) Morning Glory?

The Manchester band blew the headliners away – instantly making them seem dated and irrelevant – in a show that threatened to turn into chaos after Liam threatened a fan who’d thrown a projectile on stage.

They might not have that sense of danger in 2025, but there was a hunger and a passion that was missing from their last shows in 2009.

Fans, and some parts of the British press, are already speculating over whether Liam and Noel’s rapprochement will hold – but from the evidence on stage in Cardiff, the Gallaghers are finally, belatedly, mad fer it once more.

• Hello
• Acquiesce
• Morning Glory
• Some Might Say
• Bring it on down
• Cigarettes & Alcohol
• Fade Away
• Supersonic
• Roll With It
• Talk Tonight (Noel sings)
• Half the World Away (Noel sings)
• Little by Little (Noel sings)
• D’You Know What I Mean
• Stand By Me
• Cast No Shadow
• Slide Away
• Whatever
• Live Forever
• Rock and Roll Star

• The Masterplan (Noel sings)
• Don’t Look Back in Anger (Noel sings)
• Wonderwall
• Champagne Supernova

Asked last month whether he was planning to join Israel in attacking Iran, US President Donald Trump said “I may do it. I may not do it. Nobody knows what I’m going to do”.

He let the world believe he had agreed a two-week pause to allow Iran to resume negotiations. And then he bombed anyway.

A pattern is emerging: The most predictable thing about Trump is his unpredictability. He changes his mind. He contradicts himself. He is inconsistent.

“[Trump] has put together a highly centralised policy-making operation, arguably the most centralised, at least in the area of foreign policy, since Richard Nixon,” says Peter Trubowitz, professor of international relations at the London School of Economics.

“And that makes policy decisions more dependent on Trump’s character, his preferences, his temperament.”

Trump has put this to political use; he has made his own unpredictability a key strategic and political asset. He has elevated unpredictability to the status of a doctrine. And now the personality trait he brought to the White House is driving foreign and security policy.

It is changing the shape of the world.

Political scientists call this the Madman Theory, in which a world leader seeks to persuade his adversary that he is temperamentally capable of anything, to extract concessions. Used successfully it can be a form of coercion and Trump believes it is paying dividends, getting the US’s allies where he wants them.

But is it an approach that can work against enemies? And could its flaw be that rather than being a sleight of hand designed to fool adversaries, it is in fact based on well established and clearly documented character traits, with the effect that his behaviour becomes easier to predict?

Trump began his second presidency by embracing Russian President Vladimir Putin and attacking America’s allies. He insulted Canada by saying it should become the 51st state of the US.

He said he was prepared to consider using military force to annex Greenland, an autonomous territory of America’s ally Denmark. And he said the US should retake ownership and control of the Panama Canal.

Article 5 of the Nato charter commits each member to come to the defence of all others. Trump threw America’s commitment to that into doubt. “I think Article 5 is on life support” declared Ben Wallace, Britain’s former defence secretary.

Conservative Attorney General Dominic Grieve said: “For now the trans-Atlantic alliance is over.”

A series of leaked text messages revealed the culture of contempt in Trump’s White House for European allies. “I fully share your loathing of European freeloaders,” US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth told his colleagues, adding “PATHETIC”.

In Munich earlier this year, Trump’s Vice-President JD Vance said the US would no longer be the guarantor of European security.

That appeared to turn the page on 80 years of trans-Atlantic solidarity. “What Trump has done is raise serious doubts and questions about the credibility of America’s international commitments,” says Prof Trubowitz.

“Whatever understanding those countries [in Europe] have with the United States, on security, on economic or other matters, they’re now subject to negotiation at a moment’s notice.

“My sense is that most people in Trump’s orbit think that unpredictability is a good thing, because it allows Donald Trump to leverage America’s clout for maximum gain…

“This is one of his takeaways from negotiating in the world of real estate.”

Trump’s approach paid dividends. Only four months ago, Sir Keir Starmer told the House of Commons that Britain would increase defence and security spending from 2.3% of GDP to 2.5%.

Last month, at a Nato summit, that had increased to 5%, a huge increase, now matched by every other member of the Alliance.

Trump is not the first American president to deploy an Unpredictability Doctrine. In 1968, when US President Richard Nixon was trying to end the war in Vietnam, he found the North Vietnamese enemy intractable.

“At one point Nixon said to his National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger, ‘you ought to tell the North Vietnamese negotiators that Nixon’s crazy and you don’t know what he’s going to do, so you better come to an agreement before things get really crazy’,” says Michael Desch, professor of international relations at Notre Dame University. “That’s the madman theory.”

Julie Norman, professor of politics at University College London, agrees that there is now an Unpredictability Doctrine.

“It’s very hard to know what’s coming from day to day,” she argues. “And that has always been Trump’s approach.”

Trump successfully harnessed his reputation for volatility to change the trans-Atlantic defence relationship. And apparently to keep Trump on side, some European leaders have flattered and fawned.

Last month’s Nato summit in The Hague was an exercise in obsequious courtship. Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte had earlier sent President Trump (or “Dear Donald”) a text message, which Trump leaked.

“Congratulations and thank you for your decisive action in Iran, it was truly extraordinary,” he wrote.

On the forthcoming announcement that all Nato members had agreed to increase defence spending to 5% of GDP, he continued: “You will achieve something NO president in decades could get done.”

Anthony Scaramucci, who previously served as Trump’s communications director in his first term, said: “Mr Rutte, he’s trying to embarrass you, sir. He’s literally sitting on Air Force One laughing at you.”

And this may prove to be the weakness at the heart of Trump’s Unpredictability Doctrine: their actions may be based on the idea that Trump craves adulation. Or that he seeks short-term wins, favouring them over long and complicated processes.

If that is the case and their assumption is correct, then it limits Trump’s ability to perform sleights of hand to fool adversaries – rather, he has well established and clearly documented character traits that they have become aware of.

Then there is the question of whether an Unpredictability Doctrine or the Madman Theory can work on adversaries.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, an ally who was given a dressing down by Trump and Vance in the Oval Office, later agreed to grant the US lucrative rights to exploit Ukrainian mineral resources.

Vladimir Putin, on the other hand, apparently remains impervious to Trump’s charms and threats alike. On Thursday, following a telephone call, Trump said he was “disappointed” that Putin was not ready to end the war against Ukraine.

And Iran? Trump promised his base that he would end American involvement in Middle Eastern “forever wars”. His decision to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities was perhaps the most unpredictable policy choice of his second term so far. The question is whether it will have the desired effect.

The former British Foreign Secretary, William Hague, has argued that it will do precisely the opposite: it will make Iran more, not less likely, to seek to acquire nuclear weapons.

Prof Desch agrees. “I think it’s now highly likely that Iran will make the decision to pursue a nuclear weapon,” he says. “So I wouldn’t be surprised if they lie low and do everything they can to complete the full fuel cycle and conduct a [nuclear] test.

“I think the lesson of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi is not lost on other dictators facing the US and potential regime change…

“So the Iranians will desperately feel the need for the ultimate deterrent and they’ll look at Saddam and Gaddafi as the negative examples and Kim Jong Un of North Korea as the positive example.”

One of the likely scenarios is the consolidation of the Islamic Republic, according to Mohsen Milani, a professor of politics at the University of South Florida and author of Iran’s Rise and Rivalry with the US in the Middle East.

“In 1980, when Saddam Hussein attacked Iran his aim was the collapse of the Islamic Republic,” he says. “The exact opposite happened.

“That was the Israeli and American calculation too… That if we get rid of the top guys, Iran is going to surrender quickly or the whole system is going to collapse.”

Looking ahead, unpredictability may not work on foes, but it is unclear whether the recent shifts it has yielded among allies can be sustained.

Whilst possible, this is a process built largely on impulse. And there may be a worry that the US could be seen as an unreliable broker.

“People won’t want to do business with the US if they don’t trust the US in negotiations, if they’re not sure the US will stand by them in defence and security issues,” argues Prof Norman. “So the isolation that many in the MAGA world seek is, I think, going to backfire.”

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz for one has said Europe now needs to become operationally independent of the US.

“The importance of the chancellor’s comment is that it’s a recognition that US strategic priorities are changing,” says Prof Trubowitz. “They’re not going to snap back to the way they were before Trump took office.

“So yes, Europe is going to have to get more operationally independent.”

This would require European nations to develop a much bigger European defence industry, to acquire kit and capabilities that currently only the US has, argues Prof Desch. For example, the Europeans have some sophisticated global intelligence capability, he says, but a lot of it is provided by the US.

“Europe, if it had to go it alone, would also require a significant increase in its independent armaments production capability,” he continues. “Manpower would also be an issue. Western Europe would have to look to Poland to see the level of manpower they would need.”

All of which will take years to build up.

So, have the Europeans really been spooked by Trump’s unpredictability, into making the most dramatic change to the security architecture of the western world since the end of the Cold War?

“It has contributed,” says Prof Trubowitz. “But more fundamentally, Trump has uncorked something… Politics in the United States has changed. Priorities have changed. To the MAGA coalition, China is a bigger problem than Russia. That’s maybe not true for the Europeans.”

And according to Prof Milani, Trump is trying to consolidate American power in the global order.

“It’s very unlikely that he’s going to change the order that was established after World War Two. He wants to consolidate America’s position in that order because China is challenging America’s position in that order.”

But this all means that the defence and security imperatives faced by the US and Europe are diverging.

The European allies may be satisfied that through flattery and real policy shifts, they have kept Trump broadly onside; he did, after all, reaffirm his commitment to Article 5 at the most recent Nato summit. But the unpredictability means this cannot be guaranteed – and they have seemed to accept that they can no longer complacently rely on the US to honour its historic commitment to their defence.

And in that sense, even if the Unpredictability Doctrine comes from a combination of conscious choice and Trump’s very real character traits, it is working, on some at least.

Hundreds of rescuers have been deployed to search for people missing in central Texas, after flash floods killed 51 people, including 15 children.

The worst affected area is Kerr County where 43 people have died and where 27 children remain missing from a Christian youth camp located along the River Guadalupe.

“The work continues, and will continue, until everyone is found,” promised Larry Leitha, the sheriff of Kerr County.

People have also been confirmed dead in other parts of the state, including Travis County and Tom Green County.

Multiple flash flood warnings remain in place over the weekend in central Texas.

About 850 people have been rescued so far.

At a news conference on Saturday afternoon, Texas Governor Greg Abbott said he had signed an expanded disaster declaration to boost search efforts.

He said officials would be relentless in ensuring they locate “every single person who’s been a victim of this event”, adding that “we will stop when the job is completed”.

It remains a search and rescue mission, officials said, not a recovery effort.

They said rescuers were going up and down the Guadalupe River to try to find people who may have been swept away by the floods.

US President Donald Trump said his administration was working closely with local authorities to respond to the emergency.

Forecasters have warned that central Texas may see more flooding this weekend.

The National Weather Service (NWS) said the area could see 2 to 5in (5cm to 12cm) of rain on Saturday.

Up to 10in of rain was possible in some areas badly affected by Friday’s deluge.

Much of the rescue has focused on a large all-girls’ Christian summer camp called Camp Mystic, located along the banks of the Guadalupe River.

Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick told the BBC’s Radio 4 PM programme many of 27 missing girls were “under the age of 12”.

Pictures from the camp show it in disarray, with blankets, mattresses, teddy bears and other belongings caked in mud.

Many were asleep when the river rose more than 26ft (8m) in less than an hour in the early hours of Friday.

In an email to parents of the roughly 750 campers, Camp Mystic said that if they had not been contacted directly, their child had been accounted for.

More details of those who died have started to emerge – some were as young as eight. It has also been confirmed sisters Blair and Brooke Harber, who were 13 and 11, are among the dead.

A special Mass will be held at Notre Dame Catholic Church on Sunday for those who died or are missing, and their families.

Scores of campers holidaying during the Independence Day weekend, were also unaccounted for.

Lorena Guillen, whose home and restaurant were destroyed, had 28 holidaymakers’ cars staying on her land near the river. She told the BBC News Channel that she heard screams from a family of five.

“They were getting washed away,” Guillen said. “They were clinging on trees to be rescued. But the rescuers couldn’t get to them.”

Rachel Reed drove five hours from Dallas to pick up her daughter. She told the BBC that members of her Church and children’s school district were among the girls dead and missing.

“The families of those campers are living every parent’s worst nightmare,” she said. “Of course, it could have been me.”

Others started returning to the flooded areas.

Jonathan and Brittany Rojas visited their relatives’ home – where only the foundation remained.

They told the BBC that the mother and a baby of the family remained missing. A teenage son, Leo, survived after he became snared in barbed wire.

Another resident, Anthony, found his apartment full of mud and debris. His belongings were not salvageable, except a box holding childhood photos and his baby blanket.

“I lost everything I own,” he told the BBC. “Now I’m trying to figure things out.”

Elon Musk says he is launching a new political party, weeks after dramatically falling out with US President Donald Trump.

The billionaire announced on his social media platform X that he had set up the America Party, billing it as a challenge to the Republican and Democratic two-party system.

However, it is unclear if the party has been formally registered with US election authorities. Musk, who was born outside of the US and is thus ineligible to run for the US presidency, does not say who will lead it.

He first raised the prospect of forming a party during his public feud with Trump, which saw him leave his role in the administration and engage in a vicious public spat with his former ally.

During that row, Musk posted a poll on X asking users if there should be a new political party in the US.

Referencing that poll in his post on Saturday, Musk wrote: “By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it!

“When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy.

“Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom.”

As of Saturday, the Federal Electoral Commission had not published documents indicating the party had been formally registered.

While there have been high-profile players outside the traditional two-party system in US politics, it is difficult for them to gain strong enough nationwide popularity to pose a real threat.

In the presidential election last year, candidates from the likes of Libertarian Party, the Green Party and the People’s Party all tried in vain to stop Trump or his Democratic rival, Kamala Harris, from winning.

Musk was until recently a core supporter of Trump, dancing alongside him during election rallies last year and bringing his four-year-old son to meet Trump in the Oval Office.

He was also Trump’s key financial backer: Musk spent $250m (£187m) to help him regain office.

After the election, he was appointed to lead the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (Doge), which was tasked with identifying swingeing cuts in the federal budget.

His fallout with Trump began when he left the administration in May and publicly criticised Trump’s tax and spending plans.

The legislation – which Trump has called his “big, beautiful bill” – was narrowly passed by Congress and signed into law by the president this week.

The massive law includes huge spending commitments and tax cuts, and is estimated to add more than $3tn to the US deficit over the next decade.

Crucially for Musk, who owns electric-vehicle giant Tesla, Trump’s bill does not focus on green transition or subsidies for products like Teslas.

“Elon may get more subsidy than any human being in history, by far,” Trump wrote on his social media site, Truth Social, this week. “Without subsidies, Elon would probably have to close up shop and head back home to South Africa.”

Trump threatened to have Doge look into subsidies in favour of Musk’s companies, alluding also to the billionaire’s other businesses.

Musk also owns SpaceX, which launches rockets for the US government, and Starlink, which provides satellite service for US and European defence forces.

Ozzy Osbourne and Black Sabbath have gone out with a bang at what they say will be their final gig, in front of 40,000 fans and supported by an all-star line-up of rock legends who have been influenced by the founding fathers of heavy metal.

Ozzy, 76, who has Parkinson’s disease, sang while seated on a black throne – clapping, waving his arms and pulling wild-eyed looks, just like old times.

He appeared overwhelmed at some moments. “You have no idea how I feel. Thank you from the bottom of my heart,” he told the crowd at Villa Park in Birmingham.

He was joined by the full original Sabbath line-up for the first time in 20 years.

The show’s bill also included fellow rock gods Metallica, Guns N’ Roses, Slayer, the Rolling Stones’ Ronnie Wood and Aerosmith’s Steven Tyler.

Wearing a leather overcoat and gold armband bearing his name, Ozzy rose from below the stage in his throne to a huge roar from the crowd.

“Are you ready? Let the madness begin,” he called.

“It’s so good to be on this stage. You have no idea,” he told the crowd, who responded by chanting his name.

After playing five songs from his solo career, Ozzy was joined by his Sabbath bandmates – guitarist Tony Iommi, bassist and lyricist Geezer Butler, and drummer Bill Ward – for four more, finishing with 1970 classic Paranoid.

The Parkinson’s, other health problems and age have taken their toll, meaning he performed sitting down throughout. His voice wavered a bit but still packed a fair punch.

Fans came from all over the world – if they could get tickets – for the all-day Back to the Beginning gig at Aston Villa’s football stadium, a stone’s throw from Ozzy’s childhood home.

The star-studded show was dubbed the “heavy metal Live Aid”, and profits will go to charity.

The pitch was a sea of Black Sabbath T-shirts and rock hand signs, with some areas becoming a melee of moshing. One person waved an inflatable bat, a reference to the infamous 1982 incident when Ozzy bit the head off a live bat on stage – the most notorious moment of many in the rock star’s wild career.

The day’s other performers paid homage to him and the other band members.

“Without Sabbath there would be no Metallica,” the US group’s frontman James Hetfield told the crowd during their set. “Thank you for giving us a purpose in life.”

Guns N’ Roses’ appearance included a cover of Sabbath’s 1978 song Never Say Die, with frontman Axl Rose ending with the cry: “Birmingham! Ozzy! Sabbath! Thank you!”

A series of star-studded supergroups saw Tyler, who has suffered serious vocal problems in recent years, sound back on form as part of a band including Ronnie Wood, Blink-182’s Travis Barker and Rage Against the Machine’s Tom Morello.

Another version of the band included Smashing Pumpkins singer Billy Corgan and KK Downing from Judas Priest, another of the West Midlands’ original metal heroes.

Younger performers included Yungblud, who sang one of Sabbath’s more tender songs, Changes, originally released in 1972, and which Ozzy took to number one as a duet with daughter Kelly in 2003.

Yungblud was part of another supergroup whose revolving cast of musicians included members of Megadeth, Faith No More and Anthrax.

There was also a titanic battle of three drummers in a “drum-off” between Barker, Chad Smith from the Red Hot Chili Peppers and Danny Carey of Tool.

Pantera frontman Phil Anselmo told the crowd the artists on the bill “would all be different people” without Black Sabbath. “That’s the truth. I wouldn’t be up here with this microphone in my hand without Black Sabbath. The greatest of all time.”

Hollywood actor Jason Momoa was the show’s compere and while introducing Pantera, told fans he was joining the moshpit, saying: “Make some space for me, I’m coming in.”

At another point, he told the crowd: “The history of Black Sabbath and Ozzy Osbourne is to look back at the best who’ve ever done it. We have some of the greatest rock and metal musicians ever here today on this stage.”

Momoa’s Minecraft Movie co-star Jack Black sent a video message, as did other big names ranging from Billy Idol to Dolly Parton.

“Black Sabbath really kind of started all this, the metal era,” former Van Halen frontman Sammy Hagar told BBC News backstage. “Everyone looks at them like the kings, and if the kings are going to go out then we’re going to go honour them.

“Everyone that was asked to do this, shoot, you drop everything and do this. This is going to go down in history as the greatest metal event of all of all time.”

Ozzy said beforehand that the show would be “a goodbye as far as my live performances go, and what a way to go out”.

The line-up of legends “means everything”, he said in an interview provided by organisers.

“I am forever in their debt for showing up for me and the fans. I can’t quite put it into words, but I feel very emotional and blessed.”

Ticket prices ranged from about £200 to £2,000, with profits being shared between Cure Parkinson’s, Birmingham Children’s Hospital and Acorn Children’s Hospice.

Back to the Beginning line-up:

• Black Sabbath
• Ozzy Osbourne solo
• Metallica
• Guns N’ Roses
• Slayer
• Tool
• Pantera
• Supergroup including Billy Corgan (Smashing Pumpkins), Ronnie Wood (the Rolling Stones), Steven Tyler (Aerosmith), Adam Jones (Tool), KK Downing (Judas Priest), Vernon Reid (Living Colour), Chad Smith (Red Hot Chili Peppers), Sammy Hagar (Van Halen), Tom Morello (Rage Against the Machine), Travis Barker (Blink-182) and Tobias Forge (Ghost)
• Drum-off – Chad Smith (Red Hot Chili Peppers), Travis Barker (Blink-182) and Danny Carey (Tool)
• Gojira
• Alice in Chains
• Anthrax
• Supergroup including Lizzy Hale (Halestorm), David Ellefson (Megadeth), Mike Bordin (Faith No More), David Draiman (Disturbed), Scott Ian (Anthrax), Yungblud and Nuno Bettencourt (Extreme)
• Lamb of God
• Halestorm
• Rival Sons
• Mastodon

Two decades have passed since the 2005 London attacks, but the face of the lead suicide bomber, Mohammad Sidique Khan, has never left Dan Biddle’s memory.

It feels as real today as the day they looked into each other’s eyes.

“I can be in in the kitchen and he is stood in the garden,” says Dan, who has complex post-traumatic stress disorder.

“He’s there, dressed as he was on the day, holding the rucksack, just with his hand above it, about to detonate it again.”

Even if Dan looks away, the bomber is still there when he looks back.

“I saw this guy literally disassemble himself in front of me, and now I’m seeing him again.”

• 7 July London bombings: What happened that day?

Dan was in touching distance of Khan, on a rush-hour London Underground Circle line train on 7 July 2005. How he survived is almost beyond rational explanation.

“As as we pulled out of Edgware Road station, I could feel somebody staring at me. I was just about to turn around and say, ‘What are you looking at?’, and I see him put his hand in the bag.

“And then there was a just a brilliantly white, bright flash – heat like I’ve never experienced before.”

Khan had detonated a homemade bomb – made using an al-Qaeda-devised chemical recipe – that he was carrying in his rucksack.

The device killed David Foulkes, 22, Jennifer Nicholson, 24, Laura Webb, 29, Jonathan Downey, 34, Colin Morley and Michael Brewster, both 52.

In total, 52 people were killed that day, by four bombs detonated by Islamist extremists. Another 770 were injured.

Dan was blown out of the train, hit the tunnel wall and fell into the crawl space between the tunnel wall and the track.

His injuries were catastrophic. His left leg was blown off. His right leg was severed from the knee down. He suffered second and third-degree burns to his arms, hands and face. He lost his left eye – and his hearing on that side too.

He suffered a massive laceration to his forehead. A pole from the tube train’s internal fittings went into his body and he endured punctures and ruptures to his kidneys, lungs, colon and bowel. He later lost his spleen.

Dan was the most severely injured victim of the attacks to survive. And he was conscious throughout.

He initially thought the white flash was an electrical explosion.

Debris had fallen onto him, and his arms and hands were alight. He could see the flames flickering.

“Straight after the explosion, you could have heard a pin drop. It was almost as if everybody had just taken a big breath,” Dan says, “and then it was like opening the gates of hell. Screaming like I’ve never heard before.”

Dan could see some of the dead. He tried to push down to lever himself up from the debris. He realised how profusely he was bleeding.

“The initial feeling was one of total disbelief. It was like, surely God, this is just a nightmare.”

Dan’s mind immediately turned to his father, and how he couldn’t bear for him to witness this.

“My dad cannot be the person that walks into a mortuary and goes, ‘Yeah, that’s my son’,” Dan says. “I couldn’t bear the thought of that.”

He didn’t believe he would get out of the tunnel. But the will to survive instinctively kicked in and he screamed for help.

The first person to respond was fellow passenger Adrian Heili, who had served as a combat medic during the Kosovo war. If it had been anyone else, Dan believes he would have died.

“The first thing he said to me was, ‘Don’t worry, I’ve been in this situation before, and never lost anyone.’

“And I’m thinking, ‘How can you have gone through this before?’

“And then he said to me: ‘I’m not going to lie to you. This is really going to hurt.'”

Adrian applied a tourniquet and pinched shut the artery in Dan’s thigh to stop him bleeding to death. Dan’s life was literally in Adrian’s hands until paramedics were able to reach him about half an hour later.

Adrian helped many more in the hours that followed – and in 2009 received the Queen’s Commendation for Bravery.

Dan’s trauma was far from over. He was taken to nearby St Mary’s Hospital where he repeatedly went into cardiac arrest. At one point, a surgeon had to manually massage his heart to bring him back to life. He was given 87 units of blood.

“I think there’s something in all of us – that fundamental desire to live.

“Very few people ever get pushed to the degree where that’s required.

“My survival is down to Adrian and the phenomenal care and just brilliance of the NHS and my wife.”

Physical survival was one thing. But the toll on Dan’s mental health was another.

After eight weeks in an induced coma, Dan began a year-long journey to leaving hospital – and he realised he’d have to navigate the world outside differently.

His nights became consumed with mental torture.

He dreaded having to close his eyes and go to sleep, because he would find himself back in the tunnel.

“I wake up and [the bomber] is standing next to me,” Dan says. “I’ll be driving – he’s in the back seat of my car. I’ll look in the shop window and there’s a reflection of him – on the other side of the street.”

Those flashbacks have led to what Dan describes as survivor’s guilt.

“I’ve replayed that moment a million times over in my head. Was there something about me that made him do it? Should I have seen something about him then tried to stop it?”

By 2013 Dan had reached a dangerous low. He tried to take his own life three times.

But he had also started a relationship with his now-wife Gem – and this was a crucial turning point.

The next time he came close to suicide it was Gem’s face he saw when he closed his eyes, and he realised that if he ended his own life he would inflict appalling trauma on her.

Gem persuaded Dan to take a mental health assessment – and he began to get the expert help he needed.

In 2014 he agreed – as part of his therapy and attempts to manage the condition – to do something he thought he would never do: return to Edgware Road.

When the day came, Dan sat outside the station experiencing flashbacks and hearing the sounds of 7/7 again: screams, shouting and sirens.

He and Gem pressed on. As they entered the ticket hall there were more flashbacks.

The station manager and staff were expecting him and asked if he wanted to go down to the platform. Dan said it was a “bridge too far”. Gem insisted they all go together.

When they reached the platform, a train pulled in. Dan began to feel sick. But the train quietly moved on without incident – and by the time a third train had arrived he found the courage to board it.

“I feel really, really sick. I’m sweating. She’s crying. I’m tensing, waiting for a blast. I’m waiting for that that big heat and that pressure to hit me.”

And then the train stopped at the point in the tunnel where the bomb had gone off – an arrangement between the driver and the station manager.

“They’d stopped the train exactly where I’d been lying. I remember looking down onto the floor and it was a really weird feeling – knowing that my life really came to an end there.”

As the train pulled away, something inside Dan urged him to get off at the next station and move forward with his life.

“I’m going to leave the station, I’m going to do whatever I’m going to do today, and then I’m going to marry this amazing, beautiful woman,” he says. The two tied the knot the following year.

Eleven years on, Dan feels driven to do something positive with his life.

He now runs his own company helping disabled people into work – a professional journey he might never have embarked on had it not been for the bomb.

He still has flashbacks and bad days but he’s finding ways to manage them – and has published a book of what he has been through.

“I’m very lucky to still be alive. I’ve paid an immense, enormous price. I’ll just keep fighting every day to make sure that him and his actions never win.”

Stone stacks are a common sight along hiking trails up and down the UK.

But one walker is on a mission to highlight the damage they can do to the environment – by kicking them over.

Stuart Cox says some people have been building the stacks – some as tall as 6ft (1.8m) – using stones taken from an old wall near Mam Tor in the Peak District in Derbyshire.

A recent video he filmed of himself kicking down the stacks has been watched more than a million times on social media.

And the Peak District National Park Authority says the structures are “detrimental” to the area, and have become more prevalent in recent years.

“Look at this,” Stuart says, before swearing in frustration during his Facebook video on 20 May.

“Destroy the lot of them.” He then proceeds to kick down a stone stack.

The 57-year-old, who works as a chartered engineer, lives in the Derbyshire village of Castleton, a short drive from Mam Tor.

He’s passionate about the area, and regularly documents his hikes on his Peak District Viking page.

But his post about the dozens of stacks, built next to the busy Great Ridge footpath – about a 15-minute hike from the summit of Mam Tor – has received the most engagement.

“The majority of people have been quite supportive saying: ‘Yeah, I hate them. We reduce them back to their natural state if we see them. Totally agree with you’,” he said.

“Then I had the opposite reaction which was: ‘Don’t tell me what to do. I’ll build them if I want and I’ll carry on regardless’.

“I even had a couple of threats by private message, but I don’t worry about those.”

The Peak District is far from the only location where stone stacks have proven problematic. For example, campaigners said towers of stones on a Scottish beach were a worrying trend.

Stuart says the stacks in his video have been built using stones taken from a former boundary wall, which ran alongside the popular Great Ridge walk.

He is concerned this has damaged the habitats of the small creatures – such as frogs, toads and insects – that lived inside the wall.

It is a view shared by the National Trust.

“The majority of the stone stacks featured in this video are not on National Trust land,” a spokesperson said.

“However, there have been stacks created on parts of Mam Tor, and staff and volunteers will infrequently disassemble any found.”

The trust says stone stacks have also been an issue on land it is responsible for.

It added rangers had carried out extensive work to protect and preserve the hillfort at Mam Tor, which is a “scheduled monument and is of great archaeological importance”.

“The Peak Forest Wall is also historically significant, itself dating back to 1579,” a spokesperson added.

“Sadly, the stone stacks are not only impacting the history of the site, but they are also affecting the natural habitats of wildlife that live and feed within these ancient walls.

“In the longer-term, it will disrupt the delicate balance of the landscape.”

Stuart says there is evidence of stones being removed from paths, which he says could lead to further erosion at an already popular walking spot.

According to The Countryside Code, visitors should “leave rocks, stone, plants and trees as you find them and take care not to disturb wildlife including birds that nest on the ground”.

Anna Badcock, cultural heritage manager at the national park authority, says the stacks damage the “special qualities” of the national park and that the problem has got worse in recent years.

“[Stone stacks] are created by stone removed from historic features,” she said.

“They are very detrimental to the historic environment which we have a statutory duty to conserve.

“Like walkers’ cairns [a marker along a trail], once one is created, it encourages more.”

The authority says its rangers generally do not remove the stacks “unless they are dangerous or causing an obstruction on a right of way”.

“We’re aware that the National Trust rangers have removed some at Mam Tor for this very reason,” a spokesperson added.

Stuart said he had tried to make contact with the owner of the land on which the stacks are located, and had offered to help rebuild the wall.

And while his video has attracted some debate on social media, he hopes it might make a small difference to the place he loves.

He added: “I’m very passionate about the area, it’s an area people live and work in, and to see it being trashed, you know, it does rile you a bit.

“The more important element [of reaction to his video] was: ‘I thought you were a bit of a fool when I first watched the start of the video but by the time I got to the end of it I realised, actually I didn’t know that and from now on I will not build the stacks’.

“That’s the important bit for me. Even if a handful of people have realised the error of their ways, then that made it all the more worthwhile.”

When the BBC revealed that MI5 had lied to three courts, the Security Service apologised for giving false evidence – vowing to investigate and explain how such a serious failure had occurred.

But on Wednesday, the High Court ruled that these inquiries were “deficient”, ordering a new “robust” investigation. A panel of judges said they would consider the issue of contempt of court proceedings against individuals once that was complete.

Now we can detail how, over the past few months leading up to the judgment, MI5 continued to provide misleading evidence and tried to keep damning material secret.

The material gives an unprecedented insight into the internal chaos at MI5 as it responded to what has become a major crisis and test of its credibility.

At the heart of the case is the violent abuse of a woman by a state agent under MI5’s control. After the BBC began investigating, MI5 attempted to cover its tracks – scattering a trail of false and misleading evidence.

The case started very simply: I was investigating a neo-Nazi, who I came to understand was also an abusive misogynist and MI5 agent.

After I contacted this man – known publicly as X – in 2020 to challenge him on his extremism, a senior MI5 officer called me up and tried to stop me running a story.

The officer said X had been working for MI5 and informing on extremists, and so it was wrong for me to say he was an extremist himself.

It was this disclosure, repeated in a series of phone calls, which the Security Service would later lie about to three courts as it attempted to keep X’s role and identity shrouded in secrecy.

During the phone calls with me, MI5 denied information I had about X’s violence, but I decided to spend more time investigating. What I learned was that X was a violent misogynist abuser with paedophilic tendencies who had used his MI5 role as a tool of coercion.

He had attacked his girlfriend – known publicly as “Beth” – with a machete, and abused an earlier partner, whose child he had threatened to kill. He even had cannibal fantasies about eating children.

When I challenged both X and MI5 with our evidence, the government took me and the BBC to court in early 2022. They failed to stop the story but did win legal anonymity for X.

Arguing for secrecy in a succession of court proceedings, the Security Service told judges it had stuck to its core policy of neither confirming nor denying (NCND) informants’ identities, including during conversations with me. Crucially, this stance allowed it to keep evidence secret from “Beth”, who had taken MI5 to court.

The service aggressively maintained its position until I produced evidence proving it was untrue – including a recording of one of the calls with a senior MI5 officer.

Finally accepting it had provided false evidence, MI5’s director general Sir Ken McCallum said: “We take our duty to provide truthful, accurate and complete information very seriously, and have offered an unreserved apology to the court.”

Two investigations were commissioned: an internal MI5 disciplinary inquiry, and an external review by Sir Jonathan Jones KC, who was once the government’s chief lawyer. This latter review was personally commissioned by the Home Secretary Yvette Cooper and MI5’s director general.

Both of these concluded that the original false evidence was not due to dishonesty by MI5 or any of its officers. They effectively put it down to mistakes, both personal and systemic.

But these two inquiries quickly began to fall apart.

The government initially refused to provide both reports in full to the court.

Like many cases involving MI5, this one was held partly in secret to allow the government to use evidence which it says is too sensitive to be discussed in open hearings.

Access to the secret, closed part of the case was only available to the government, the judge and security-cleared barristers known as special advocates who were representing the BBC – but who were not allowed to communicate directly with us.

The government said it would not be providing any closed evidence about the two inquiries to the judge or the special advocates.

Instead, it provided an “open” version of Sir Jonathan’s external review, with apparently sensitive material edited out, and it purported to provide a full account of the internal inquiry in a witness statement by MI5’s director general of strategy – known as Witness B.

Sir Jonathan wrote that he was “satisfied” that the open version was a “fair and accurate” account of his full review. Witness B, third-in-command at the Security Service, said in his statement: “I am satisfied that there is nothing in the closed material that has been excluded from the open report which prevents MI5 from providing the court with a frank and accurate account.”

During hearings, the government argued against disclosing secret material to the court. It eventually agreed to hand over the secret version of Sir Jonathan’s review, and then was ordered to disclose the internal investigation report described by Witness B, along with policy documents and notes of interviews with MI5 officers.

When the disclosure came, it was clear why MI5 was so keen to keep it secret: the summaries, including the one from MI5’s third-in-command, were not fair or accurate. Key information had been withheld, which undermined their conclusions.

In short, the court was still being misled.

At the same time, in response to the inquiries, I was submitting new evidence which proved that some of the claims made by the two reviews were false.

Neither the internal investigation nor Sir Jonathan Jones contacted me, despite the fact I was the only other person who really knew what had been said in all the phone calls at the centre of the case.

The two official reviews concluded that the senior officer who called me – Officer 2 – failed to recall telling me that X was an agent.

“There is nothing surprising in this narrative, which is ultimately about the fallibility of memory in the absence of a written record,” as the Security Service put it in legal submissions.

The Jones review said that, because no formal record was made of the calls, by the time MI5 was preparing evidence the “only first-hand evidence available was Officer 2’s personal recollection”.

Sir Jonathan said the officer’s recollection was “uncertain”, although it had hardened over time into a position that he had not departed from NCND.

But material that MI5 and the government sought to keep secret shows that Officer 2 gave a detailed recollection of the conversation with me – until I exposed it as false.

His recollection was contained in a note of an internal MI5 meeting, arranged to discuss what to tell the special advocates and the court about the conversations with me. In it, the officer insisted he did not depart from NCND and gave a melodramatic account of my “long pauses” as I said I needed the story, before I eventually became cooperative and said I had “seen the light”.

This was all untrue. He also falsely claimed I had revealed that I had spoken to X’s former girlfriend, when I had done no such thing.

The note also showed that Officer 2 had told colleagues that he persuaded me to drop the story by implying that agent X was being investigated by MI5 as an extremist. This was the exact opposite of what he had in fact told me, which was that X was an MI5 agent rather than a real extremist.

Sir Jonathan was aware of the full version of this elaborate false account, but it was absent from the unclassified version given to the court and the BBC.

The MI5 internal review also claimed that Officer 2 had a lapse of memory.

It said that Officer 2 had told another officer – a key figure involved in preparing the Security Service’s false evidence for the court, known as Officer 3 – that he could not remember whether he had departed from NCND.

In his statement to court, Witness B – MI5’s director general of strategy – said Officer 2 had said “they could not recall the details” of the conversations with me but “did not think they had departed from NCND” and believed “they would have remembered if they had done so”.

But an internal note by Officer 3, written after his discussion with Officer 2, contained a very different account.

It stated unequivocally that “we did not breach NCND” and that the contact with me “was prefaced with confirmation that this conversation was not on the record”.

It also stated that, “after being initially fairly bullish, De Simone said that he acknowledged the strength of the argument, and agreed to remove those references”.

All three claims were false, including about the conversations being off the record, something now accepted by MI5.

The evidence showed specific false claims being presented as memories – not the absence of memory the two inquiries said they found.

The question of memory was so important because the court was told that written records were not available.

Witness B – MI5’s third-in-command – said the internal investigation established that Officer 2 had “updated colleagues within MI5” about the conversations with me, but that “there was no evidence identified of any written record being made, by Officer 2 or anyone else”.

“The fact of the matter was that Officer 2 was reliant on personal recollection alone which inevitably carries a degree of inherent uncertainty,” Witness B said in his statement to court.

Sir Jonathan gave the same impression in his review.

But the secret material MI5 was forced to hand over proved this was false. There were several written records consistent with what had really happened – that MI5 had chosen to depart from NCND and that several people were aware of it.

There was a decision log.

There were notes of conversations with Agent X himself.

There were emails.

The decision log showed that, just after the authorisation took place, a formal record was created saying the plan was to call the BBC and “reveal the MI5 link to X”. The log then noted: “This was discussed with Officer 2 who subsequently approached the BBC to begin this conversation.”

In an internal email, after I had said I would not include X in an initial story, one of X’s handling team reported this development to other MI5 officers and accurately described the approach to me, namely that Officer 2 had claimed my proposed story was “incorrect” and the rationale for this was that most of the material was as a “direct result of his tasking” as an MI5 agent.

Notes of calls and meeting with Agent X show he approved the plan to reveal his MI5 role and was kept updated about the calls. In a later meeting with him, MI5 recorded that he was “happy” to meet with me, which was an offer MI5 had made and I ignored.

But it showed that MI5 and X were well aware of the NCND departure, because the Security Service would obviously only try to arrange a meeting with someone like X if they an agent.

In a telling note, MI5 said X thought that a meeting with me would “hopefully serve to counter some of the conclusions that the journalist had reached about X”. This is a violent, misogynistic neo-Nazi, a danger to women and children, yet MI5 wanted to do PR for him with a journalist.

These records and others show that the handling team for agent X understood there had been an NCND departure. This was unsurprising as the calls with me at the time made it clear that his case officers knew what was happening.

But the internal investigation report records how, as MI5 was preparing to take the BBC to court to block our story on X, one officer went around convincing colleagues that no such departure had ever taken place.

Officer 3 spoke several times to a member of the agent-handling team within MI5 – known as Officer 4 – regarding what had been said to me about X.

“We have already named him pal,” said Officer 4, according to Officer 4’s evidence to the investigation and Officer 3 replied: “I can categorically tell you we didn’t”.

After these conversations, Officer 4 said he felt the other officer had put him “back in his box”. Other members of the handling team thought what Officer 3 was saying was “odd” and “weird”.

MI5 has given completely contradictory explanations for how the false claim about not departing from NCND had got into its witness statement.

The claim was given to court by an officer known as Witness A, acting as a corporate witness – meaning he was representing the organisation rather than appearing as someone necessarily involved personally in the events.

When the government was trying to stop the BBC publishing its story about X in 2022, the BBC’s special advocates asked how Witness A could be so sure that NCND had not been breached.

The government’s lawyers said “Witness A spoke to the MI5 officer who had contact with the BBC” – meaning Officer 2 – and the officer had said he neither confirmed nor denied agent X’s role. The lawyers’ answers strongly appeared to suggest that the pair had even spoken at the time of the calls with me.

After we exposed Witness A’s false evidence, the lawyers’ answers created a problem for MI5 as it either suggested Officer 2 had lied all along – or that he and Witness A were both lying.

It has since been claimed that the men did not speak to each other at the time of the calls with me.

Despite not reconciling these contradictory accounts, the investigation concluded “the parties were collectively doing their best to prepare a witness statement that was accurate”.

Officer 2 claimed that he had never departed from NCND before and said that was a key reason why he would have recalled doing so.

But new evidence I submitted to court showed he had also told me whether or not five other people I was investigating were working with the Security Service. One of them was an undercover MI5 officer – one of the most sensitive and memorable details an officer could disclose.

Officer 2 had invited me to meet this undercover officer, just as he had offered me the chance to meet Agent X. I had not pursued either offer, which I thought were a crude attempt at pulling me into MI5’s orbit.

Indeed, the internal MI5 material suggests that its officers wrongly believe that the role of journalists is to be cheerleaders for the Security Service. I was variously described as “bullish”, “stubborn”, “awkward”, and not “as on board as other journalists”.

They said, before their involvement with me, the BBC was seen as “friendly” and “supportive” of MI5. In reality, journalists like me are here to scrutinise and challenge the organisation.

The five other NCND departures were not apparently uncovered by MI5’s internal investigators, nor by Sir Jonathan Jones.

Disclosing agent X’s role would have been memorable and unusual on its own.

But the fact there were also departures on NCND relating to five other people made the chain of events even more extraordinary, and made any claimed loss of memory by Officer 2 – and in MI5 more widely – simply unbelievable.

Both inquiries failed to speak to key people who were on the calls they were supposed to be investigating. Neither of them spoke to me – but there were other omissions too.

Sir Jonathan’s review wrongly claimed that “only Officer 2 had been party to the calls” with me. In fact, Officer 2 had invited another senior officer to join one of the calls. He introduced himself by saying: “I head up all counter-terrorism investigations here.”

He referred to my earlier “conversations” with Officer 2 and was plainly aware of their content – he even made a specific pun about something connected to X.

While MI5’s internal investigation was aware that the head of counter-terror investigations had joined one of the calls and mentioned it in their secret report, investigators never bothered interviewing him.

After I submitted new evidence, MI5 was forced to speak to him – but the internal investigators concluded there was nothing to show he knew about NCND departures.

Sir Jonathan had also failed to speak to the MI5 officer at the centre of the case, Officer 2. He had simply adopted the conclusions of the internal inquiry – in which MI5 was investigating itself.

It emerged during the court case that Sir Jonathan did speak to MI5 director general Sir Ken McCallum for his investigation. But when the BBC’s special advocates requested any notes of the interview, they were told that none existed.

“MI5’s job is to keep the country safe,” Sir Ken said after the High Court judgement. “Maintaining the trust of the courts is essential to that mission.”

Because of this case, the courts have made plain that MI5’s practices should change. The government says it is reviewing how the service prepares and gives evidence.

Because NCND has been abandoned in relation to Agent X, Beth will now have a fairer trial of her legal claim against MI5. The monolithically consistent way in which the policy has been presented, including in a string of important cases, has been shown to be untrue.

This has become a story about whether MI5 can be believed, and about how it uses its privileged position to conceal and lie.

But in the beginning – and in the end – it is a story about violence against women and girls, about the importance placed on that crucial issue by the state, and about how covering up for abusive misogynists never ends well.

The warning signs were already flashing as hundreds of young people celebrated the Fourth of July public holiday at Camp Mystic, an all-girls’ Christian summer retreat, nestled on the banks of the Guadalupe River in Texas.

There had not been a drop of rain in the area recently until the inundation, when the river rose 26ft (8m) in less than an hour, according to state officials.

By Saturday evening, at least 51 people were dead, including 15 children.

• Search for missing continues
• Texas flood victims: Girl ‘living her best life’ and ‘heart and soul’ of camp

The first hint of the devastation to come appeared on Thursday morning as rain and thunderstorms soaked a number of central Texas counties.

The National Weather Service (NWS) issued a common warning called a flood watch at 13:18 that afternoon for parts of the region, including Kerr County.

In the early hours of Friday, the outlook became more dire as the NWS issued a series of upgraded warnings. The San Saba river, the Concho River and the Colorado River were rising.

At 04:03, the NWS sent a “particularly dangerous situation” alert, reserved for the most urgent and potentially deadly scenarios such as wildfires.

Another “particularly dangerous situation” warning was issued for the city of Kerrville at 05:34, before dawn on Friday.

“Residents and campers should SEEK HIGHER GROUND NOW! Life threatening flash flooding along the river is expected,” forecasters said.

“Automated rain gauges indicate a large and deadly flood wave is moving down the Guadalupe River. Flash flooding is already occurring.”

Such alerts are shared on NWS social media accounts and by broadcast news outlets, but most people were asleep.

Elinor Lester, 13, said younger campers at Camp Mystic were bunked in cabins closer to the riverbank and those were the first to flood.

“The camp was completely destroyed,” Elinor, who was evacuated by helicopter, told the Associated Press news agency. “It was really scary.”

Just outside Kerrville, the BBC met Jonathan and Brittany Rojas as they came to see what was left of a relative’s home. Only the foundations remain.

Five people were in the house the night of the deluge – the mother and her baby are still missing.

The teenage son, Leo, survived after he became snared in barbed wire, preventing him from being swept away. The boy is recovering in hospital.

As the BBC was interviewing the Rojas couple, a neighbour walked up to present them with an item salvaged from the house.

It was the teenager’s money jar. The label on it read, “Leo’s survival kit”.

Desperate Camp Mystic parents took to social media looking for news of their children.

One Facebook group – Kerrville Breaking News – turned into a missing persons page.

Some parents have since updated their social media pleas to say their missing family members did not survive.

Kerr County is in the heart of the Texas Hill Country, a getaway destination because of its scenic rolling hills, countless rivers and lakes and abundance of wineries.

But the region is also known as “Flash Flood Alley”, because of the recurring threat that has devastated local communities over the years.

When asked why the riverside summer camp was not evacuated, officials said the sudden scale of the deluge caught them unawares.

“No-one knew this kind of flood was coming,” Kerr County Judge Rob Kelly said.

Sabrina Carpenter brought her signature sugary pop sound to a crowd of 65,000 at London’s BST Festival on Saturday night.

The 26-year-old has built a brand around sexual confidence and racy lyrics, which were noticeably toned down as the US singer embraced a more family friendly show in London’s Hyde Park.

At one point a graphic flashed up on screen advising “parental discretion” as Carpenter launched into album track Bed Chem. She ditched her usual sexually suggestive performance on song Juno and instead used a cannon to fire t-shirts into the crowd.

Despite these changes she was still at her best, storming through a 17-song tracklist that comprised her biggest hits, charming the crowd with her Hollywood smile and incredibly bouncy hair.

Carpenter writes music for women of the dating app generation and her songs are filled with the type of anecdotes you’ve heard over Friday night drinks with the girls – from the anger over not getting closure to the fear of a man embarrassing you when they meet all your friends.

Perhaps that is what makes her so relatable. She’s a talented singer and dancer who shot to fame on the Disney Channel, but she could also so easily be your mate who brings over ice cream when you’re going through a break-up.

Her ability to switch from a sassy upbeat dance number to a vulnerable, acoustic solo performance is also impressive.

She’s an accomplished performer for someone whose breakout hit, Espresso, is little over a year old. But much to the surprise of many, she’s been in this game for a very long time.

The Pennsylvania-born star began posting videos of herself on YouTube at the age of 10 and came third in a competition to find the next Miley Cyrus a year later.

After starring in a few small acting roles, the singer became a bona fide Disney star in 2013 when she was cast in TV series Girl Meets World.

She began releasing music the following year and has released six albums to date, but has only recently received global recognition.

Carpenter became the first female artist to hold both the number one and number two positions on the UK singles chart for three consecutive weeks in 2024 and she also became the first artist in 71 years to spend 20 weeks at the top of the charts with Espresso.

From watching her live, it appears she’s been waiting patiently for this moment for quite some time, to perform on the biggest stages around the world and to thousands of fans – something she references a few times between songs.

She told the crowd she was “so, so grateful” that the audience had chosen to spend their Saturday evening with her, gushing that “London is so fun and there’s so much to do here”.

Much of the cheekiness she has built her brand on was weaved in throughout her performance, including 1950s style infomercials advertising sprays that erase no-good men from your life and mattresses that are perfect for “activities”.

But aside from a racy rendition of Bed Chem and a snippet of Pony by Ginuine (one for the Magic Mike fans) the show was more PG than expected.

Perhaps it was due to the large volume of young children stood in the crowd amongst us Gen Zs and millennials.

Or perhaps the pop princess needs a break from making headlines.

The first was back in March, when her Brit Awards opening performance was criticised for being too racy for pre-watershed television.

Media watchdog Ofcom received more than 800 complaints, with the majority relating to Carpenter’s choreography with dancers dressed in Beefeater outfits.

Then in June this year she was once again under fire for sharing artwork for her new album, Man’s Best Friend, which showed her on her hands and knees in a short dress whilst an anonymous man in a suit grabbed her hair.

Carpenter then revealed alternative artwork she said was “approved by God” and shows her holding the arm of a suited man.

Criticism for the original artwork came from charities including Glasgow Women’s Aid which supports victims of domestic abuse. It said Carpenter’s album cover was “regressive” and “promotes an element of violence and control”.

Heather Binning of Women’s Rights Network, also told the BBC that violence against women should “never be used as satire”.

But what Saturday’s performance showed is that Carpenter is a true professional, someone who can easily adapt both her style and setlist to cater to different audiences.

She ended the show perfectly, taking to a crane that panned across the huge mass of people, thrilling fans and giving them the opportunity for a close-up video to post on their social media.

“Damn nobody showed up,” she joked, adding: “London thank you so much for having us tonight, this has to be one of the biggest shows I’ve played in my entire life.”

She wrapped up with Espresso, marking the end of the show by downing some in martini-form from a crystal glass.

There were a few mutters from the crowd, who perhaps were expecting a special guest or two, but it was clear from the offset that this would be a defining moment in the popstar’s career and one where she only wants the spotlight on her.

Israel has decided to send a delegation to Qatar on Sunday for proximity talks with Hamas on the latest proposal for a Gaza ceasefire and hostage release deal.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said he had accepted the invitation despite what he described as the “unacceptable” changes that Hamas wanted to make to a plan presented by mediators from Qatar, the US and Egypt.

On Friday night, Hamas said it had delivered a “positive response” to the proposal for a 60-day ceasefire and that it was ready for negotiations.

However, a Palestinian official said the group had sought amendments including a guarantee that hostilities would not resume if talks on a permanent truce failed.

In Gaza itself, the Hamas-run Civil Defence agency said Israeli strikes and gunfire killed at least 35 Palestinians on Saturday.

Seven people were killed, including a doctor and his three children, when tents in the al-Mawasi area were bombed, according to a hospital in the nearby city of Khan Younis.

Meanwhile, two American employees of the controversial aid distribution organisation backed by Israel and the US – the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) – were wounded in what it said was a grenade attack at its site in the Khan Younis area.

The Israeli and US governments both blamed Hamas, which has not commented.

Late on Saturday, the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office said in a statement that “the changes that Hamas is seeking to make” to the ceasefire proposal were “unacceptable to Israel”.

But it added: “In light of an assessment of the situation, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has directed that the invitation to proximity talks be accepted and that the contacts for the return of our hostages – on the basis of the Qatari proposal that Israel has agreed to – be continued. The negotiating team will leave tomorrow.”

Earlier, an Israeli official had briefed local media that there was “something to work with” in the way that Hamas had responded.

Mediators are likely to have their work cut out to bridge the remaining gaps at the indirect talks in Doha.

Watching them closely will be US President Donald Trump, who has been talking up the chances of an agreement in recent days.

On Friday, before he was briefed on Hamas’s response, he said it was “good” that the group was positive and that “there could be a Gaza deal next week”.

Trump is due to meet Netanyahu on Monday, and it is clear that he would very much like to be able to announce a significant breakthrough then.

The families of Israeli hostages and Palestinians in Gaza will also once again be holding their breath.

Hostages’ relatives and thousands of their supporters attended a rally in Tel Aviv on Saturday night to call for a comprehensive deal that would bring home all of the hostages.

Among those who spoke was Yechiel Yehoud. His daughter Arbel Yehoud was released from captivity during the last ceasefire, which Trump helped to broker before he took office and which collapsed when Israel resumed its offensive in March.

“President Trump, thank you for bringing our Arbel back to us. We will be indebted to you for the rest of our lives. Please don’t stop, please make a ‘big beautiful hostages deal’,” he said.

On Tuesday, the US president said that Israel had accepted the “necessary conditions” for a 60-day ceasefire, during which the parties would work to end the war.

The plan is believed to include the staggered release of 10 living Israeli hostages by Hamas and the bodies of 18 other hostages in exchange for Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails.

Fifty hostages are still being held in Gaza, at least 20 of whom are believed to be alive.

The proposal also reportedly says sufficient quantities of aid would enter Gaza immediately with the involvement of the UN and the International Committee of the Red Cross.

A senior Palestinian official familiar with the talks told the BBC on Friday that Hamas was demanding aid be distributed exclusively by the UN and its partners, and that the GHF’s operations end immediately.

Another amendment demanded by Hamas was about Israeli troop withdrawals, according to the official.

The US proposal is believed to include phased Israeli pull-outs from parts of Gaza. But the official said Hamas wanted troops to return to the positions they held before the last ceasefire collapsed in March, when Israel resumed its offensive.

The official said Hamas also wanted a US guarantee that Israeli air and ground operations would not resume even if the ceasefire ended without a permanent truce.

The proposal is believed to say mediators will guarantee that serious negotiations will take place from day one, and that they can extend the ceasefire if necessary.

The Israeli prime minister has ruled out ending the war until all of the hostages are released and Hamas’s military and governing capabilities are destroyed.

Far-right members of his cabinet have also expressed their opposition to the proposed deal.

National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir said on Saturday that the only way to secure the return of the hostages was the “full conquest of the Gaza Strip, a complete halt to so-called ‘humanitarian’ aid, and the encouragement of emigration” of the Palestinian population.

The Israeli military launched a campaign in Gaza in response to the 7 October 2023 attack, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 others were taken hostage.

At least 57,338 people have been killed in Gaza since then, according to the territory’s Hamas-run health ministry.